On that topic, the best way to safeguard from illegal file trading, etc is on the server level--not client. Yes, you may find earlier at one time I said mirc should, but I have since thought about it. mIRC adding things to its software would be both ineffective as well as bad for "business?".

Lets examine both ideas. Khaled goes ahead an adds the build in ptoection against illegal filesharing, and everyone's happy--right? Wrong, those who do fileshare will stay with lower versions of mirc. They just wont upgrade, finding they can share illegal "warez" just as well with version 5~6.x, then with the new and improved 7.xwith filesharing protections! If they don't prefer staying with an older version, they could just switch clients. You would need all clients to incorperate protections for it to be 100% effective.

How about the other alternative, where Khaled adds the protections, then people are outraged. Everyone announces "mIRC breaks privacy act"where users should have a right to what they do and dont't share. Many become angered, and for no reason (like they almost always are) mirc.com gets DDoS'd and is forced to take either legal action, or shut down.

I mean both are a worst case scenario, but not far from the truth. Adding a DCC illegal file transfer protection would be like takig down a tank with a BB gun. Sure you can make as many shots as you want, but its not going to do any real harm. As ++The Mentor++ said, "You may stop this individual, but you can't stop us all... after all, we're all alike." He was talking about hackers (not crackers--i don't want to be corrected by the one whom finds in neccisery to rename freeware) but it's still the general idea. You can take down a small portion of the whole picute, but you'll never get rid of all of it.


-KingTomato