[pseudo555]

Maybe you can try with older protection identifier (like clony xxl - i'm not sure clonyxxl can help)...

[evlncrn8]

for 16 bit, i really doubt it will

[Popup-Box]

I've got ClonyXL Final, and I scanned the CD in question with all protection identifiers available to me a few days ago. I'm quite certain that I would have noticed it and remembered if Clony XL Final actually did recognize the specific version of the protection. As far as I remember it didn't. I did scan the virtual drive on which I mounted an image of the CD now - Clony suggested it was an audio CD (there are sound files on it, which obviously confused Clony). I'll scan the actual CD with Clony again soon just to be sure.

[Popup-Box]

ClonyX Final detected, among other things, the following about the CD:

Tracks: 1
Data tracks: 1
Audio tracks: 0
CD Name: CM2
CD serial: BBECCE92
Total: 649 MB

Dummy Files: no
Overburn: no
TOC: ok
Track length: ok

Copy-protection or CD typ: LaserLok

The "LaserLok" is clickable, and it provides a suggestion for settings associated with CloneCD. I may try once more to create an image with CloneCD and burn it on the cd-rw, although I am also quite sure I tried a week ago without success. I can't recall exactly whether I used the settings that ClonyX suggested. However, if I did not, I still guess that the settings suggested by ClonyX correspond to a great extent, maybe completely, with the settings suggested by other identifier applications that suggested settings for LaserLok protected CDs.

[Popup-Box]

Anyone with suggestions now?

It appears that the CD is in a dubious condition, which isn't surprising considering it was bought in 1996, and there are visible hints of its age. That said, I'll test the CD on another computer in order to verify that it is getting worse.

[gf7]

Scan the CD with BurnOut.
It should tell you the Laserlockversion.

[evlncrn8]

and burnout reads 16 bit executables now? ;p

[gf7]

yes, it does

[Popup-Box]

BurnOut detected "LaserLock", no mention of any particular version, however.

[evlncrn8]

Originally Posted by gf7

yes, it does

actually thats kinda incorrect isn't it.. it looks for MZ, then scans for a string, there's no executable processing per-se, which is what i meant in my question