does this mean, for example, that if my pc crashed and I had to restore, losing an authorisation key from ilm, that when I went to activate again, because I hadn't changed motherboard or cpu that my install count would still be three, even though I'd lost one code? thanks. Hope to hear from you soon From Martin. Please email me: m.wilsher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx or martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx thanks. please visit my website: www.btinternet.com/@m.wilsher----- ----- Original Message ----- From: George Bell To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 11:59 AM Subject: [access-uk] FW: JAWS Activation Process OK guys, Here's the situation as stated from Mervyn Robertson of Sight & Sound in the U.K. George. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Mervyn Robertson Sent: 24 March 2005 11:27 To: George Bell Subject: RE: JAWS Activation Process George Part of the authorisation process generates a digital fingerprint of the user's system (called a 'locking code'). This will not change unless a major system component is changed (motherboard, CPU, etc.). This should mean that reinstalls do not change the status of the number of times that the user has installed. It should be pointed out that the number of installs is nominally set at 3 (the old authorisation disk usually had an install count of 5). This is not a finite limit but intended to be a level beyond which 'might' mean that copy protection has been violated or the product has been stolen, shared with someone else, etc. We spend a lot of time discussing different scenarios with users who want to install on more than three machines and being flexible is part of the game. It should also be pointed out that replacement of the authorisation disk (because it was faulty or damaged) physically took around 10-14 days. Now the scheme is electronic, the user can request install count resets over the net or can give Sight & Sound a call (or the company that sold them JAWS, who can in turn get in touch with us) and we can get install counts reset. Much, much quicker than it ever was! If GW Micro don't want to protect their product then that's their business! All of the other major manufacturers are, or are in the process of, putting some form of protection in place. Microsoft, quite rightly, is making a huge effort to make people aware that pirating will not be tolerated (I am getting several flyers a day!) so I don't see why other companies should not follow suit! Mervyn ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This Message has been scanned for viruses by McAfee Groupshield.