Microsoft drops its XP pirate checks.

[ViRaL1]

I mentioned a car earlier. The car dealer does not ask you three years after you bought the car from them, if you bought the car.

Good example. But to extend it even more, the car manufacturer doesn't plant a bug in your car that sucks out whatever information it wants out of your car's computer and transmit it back to them everyday when you start your car.

Umm . . OnStar!

OnStar is a separate company that has a partnership with General Motors.

General Motors does not ask you if you bought the car.

OnStar is also a subsciption service that you pay the OnStar Company every year to maintain that service.

...and optional. As of yet, I haven't heard about anyone being locked out of their own car because OnStar mistakenly thought they weren't an authorized user.

[ROF]

I also have not heard of anyone being forced to buy or install Microsoft Windows Operating Systems.

[ROF]

...and optional. As of yet, I haven't heard about anyone being locked out of their own car because OnStar mistakenly thought they weren't an authorized user.

Maybe not but there are literally hundreds of lawsuits and a few class action suits because of the information OnStar collects and passes along to third party individuals without the owner knowing.

[Sam Ontario]

I will be quite happy when my old laptop is no longer in use and transfer the license to my new desktop but there is no such a mechanism informing MS about the change and then I have a illegal copy on my desktop. My license is obsolete with my old laptop which I think is unfair as I have already paid for the license. It will be a lot happier with MS if the license is transferable! What MS should establish is if the same license has been on 2 or more machines working simultaneously which I believe are illegal copies.

Similary, if there is someone who dislike the OS, unloaded it from his/her machine and sell it to someone else with the key, the CD and everything comes with the license, there should be a meschanism to do so, instead of the 2nd person who newly own the used license on his.her machine becomes illegal.

[ROF]

It will be a lot happier with MS if the license is transferable! What MS should establish is if the same license has been on 2 or more machines working simultaneously which I believe are illegal copies.

Exactly my point and Microsofts point of periodical checks? How if the check only occurs once is Microsoft supposed to determine whether it is installed on multiple machines and in use simultaneously? How? They periodically check and capture data beyond just the OS serial number to make sure the machine licensed for that software is being used properly under the license agreement. Right, Wrong, Does it matter? It shouldn't because you always have the option to click "no" when reading the EULA at install.

[Supreme2k]

Been there, done that. Got it fixed in less than 20 minutes time. That's a small price to pay for the billions of thieves out there.

So why am I (or you) paying any price for their thief problem? Their tactics NEVER hurt the real thieves.

When I walk into my bank, I have been there billions of times before yet I notice that there are several cameras which watch my every action. Why is that? Because yesterday I may have been doing business yet today I might decide to rob the place. They keep checking no matter how many times I visit, no matter how much business I do there or profits they make from my loans. ....

Why do you keep using that completely idiotic bank analogy?!

The bank's dynamics change minute-to-minute. They need the security. When you buy the software and install it, that's it. There is no constant flow of people, as at a bank. A bank is open to the public and ever-changing. Though someone may walk in off the street and rob the bank (most likely not a regular customer), your copy of Windows XP will not decide one day to become a pirate copy.

I also have not heard of anyone being forced to buy or install Microsoft Windows Operating Systems.

Now who's living in another country? Everyone knows that MS/Windows is a monopoly. You use Windows, or you don't use like 90% of all software made.

[ROF]

Been there, done that. Got it fixed in less than 20 minutes time. That's a small price to pay for the billions of thieves out there.

So why am I (or you) paying any price for their thief problem? Their tactics NEVER hurt the real thieves.

Why am I subject to baggage search and wand scans at an airport? Why are children forced to walk through metal detectors at school? Why was my vehicle searched from top to bottom last month when I came across the border? Why? Because innocent until proven guilty are just mere words. They no longer hold any meaning in soceity. Big Brother is always watching. Your information and data are everywhere. You will be watched.

When I walk into my bank, I have been there billions of times before yet I notice that there are several cameras which watch my every action. Why is that? Because yesterday I may have been doing business yet today I might decide to rob the place. They keep checking no matter how many times I visit, no matter how much business I do there or profits they make from my loans. ....

Why do you keep using that completely idiotic bank analogy?!

The bank's dynamics change minute-to-minute. They need the security. When you buy the software and install it, that's it. There is no constant flow of people, as at a bank. A bank is open to the public and ever-changing. Though someone may walk in off the street and rob the bank (most likely not a regular customer), your copy of Windows XP will not decide one day to become a pirate copy.

How many banks are robbed daily? How many illegal copies of windows XP are in use? Do you have the same copy of Windows XP installed on two machines? Did you fix a friends computer and install your OS on there? Did you share your copy of Office? Ever do a search on any P2P network for Microsoft or Adobe? If you think the bank dynamics change from minute to minute you should see what happens in all those situations every second of everyday.

I also have not heard of anyone being forced to buy or install Microsoft Windows Operating Systems.

Now who's living in another country? Everyone knows that MS/Windows is a monopoly. You use Windows, or you don't use like 90% of all software made.

Still, that's a choice you make. Sure Microsoft could be considered a monopoly, but most people with a knowledge of business realize that Microsoft has garnered the largest market share simply because nobody has presented any worthy competition in that same marketplace. The only people who think otherwise are linux geeks, people who hate big businesses, and a few judges who had their rulings against Microsoft overturned.

[Dv8ted2]

Because innocent until proven guilty are just mere words. They no longer hold any meaning in soceity.

The courts would disagree. This concept still holds true to this day in the courts as it did when the court system was first created.

Big Brother is always watching. Your information and data are everywhere. You will be watched.

It is not up to you to play judge advocate general, and the fact that you support such behavior is reprehensible

[ROF]

It is not up to you to play judge advocate general, and the fact that you support such behavior is reprehensible

It sounds like someone is judging me when I am just offering my opinion and not making any judgments about anything. As I said before, the way Microsoft implemented this is probably not the best way they could have done it, but the WGA checks no matter if they are daily, hourly, weekly, monthly, at each boot up or whenever makes no difference to me. I am completely uneffected by it. My Anti-virus software phoned home this morning. It downloaded an update and installed the update without me knowing. Am I complaining? Nope. It does not effect me. The WGA check is the same thing. It has zero effect on my daily computing experience.

[Dv8ted2]

My Anti-virus software phoned home this morning. It downloaded an update and installed the update without me knowing. Am I complaining? Nope. It does not effect me. The WGA check is the same thing. It has zero effect on my daily computing experience.

You are trying to compare two totally unrelated things. The anti-virus program is looking for virus definition updates to help protect your computer. It is not "assuming" you are a thief.

[ROF]

My Anti-virus software phoned home this morning. It downloaded an update and installed the update without me knowing. Am I complaining? Nope. It does not effect me. The WGA check is the same thing. It has zero effect on my daily computing experience.

You are trying to compare two totally unrelated things. The anti-virus program is looking for virus definition updates to help protect your computer. It is not assuming you are a thief.

Incorrect. It is also checking to make sure I have a valid license(checking to make sure I am not a thief using Warez or invalid software) to receive those updates. If not I am cut off and my anti-virus program is shut down, which is exactly what Microsoft should do but hasn't.

[RLT69]

OMG, Call the Feds. Microsoft knows I have a 300GB hard drive and an AMD X2 Processor. What a travesty of data mining.

And yet you did not address the issue of Microsoft SPYING on people by collecting this information.
This constitutes spying.

Which laws would those be?

Be careful what you asked for:

The first lawsuit, filed by Kamber & Associates, relied upon the following statutes:

* Washington State's Consumer Protection Act
* Washington Rev. Code Section 19.86.020
* Washington's anti-spyware laws, specifically Washington Rev. Code Section 19.270.040
* the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act
* California Civil Code Section 1750 et seq.
* California's anti-spyware laws, specifically California Business & Professions Code Section 22947.4
* California's Unfair Competition Law, California Business & Professions Code Section 17200.

The second lawsuit, filed by the Houck Law Firm, lists the following statutes and claims:

* The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 1030, alleging Microsoft "intentionally access[ed] a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtain[ed] ... information from any protected computer if the conduct involved an interstate or foreign communication" in violation of this Act.
* Washington State's Consumer Protection Act ("Microsoft's actions are unfair and deceptive...Microsoft has represented that its WGA software have characteristics, uses or benefits which they do not have....Microsoft installed the WGA programs in defective prerelease condition ... Microsoft's policies and practices are unlawful, unethical, oppressive, fraudulent and malicious. The gravity of the harm to all consumers from Microsoft's policies and practices far outweighs any purported utility those policies and practices have.")
* Washington's Computer Spyware Act, RCW Section 19.270.040 ("Microsoft takes control of the Class's computers and modifies settings that could cause damage to their computers or lead to the stealing of the owner or operators personally identifiable information in order to commit fraud....Microsoft induces an owner or operator to install its WGA software onto the computer by intentionally misrepresenting the extent to which installing the software is necessary for security or privacy reasons.")
* Breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
* Intentional misrepresentation.

Source: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060705042741949

Bet you didn't expect that! :P

[Dv8ted2]

Incorrect. It is also checking to make sure I have a valid license(checking to make sure I am not a thief using Warez or invalid software) to receive those updates. If not I am cut off and my anti-virus program is shut down, which is exactly what Microsoft should do but hasn't.

Have you ever heard of perpetual licenses?

The software that I use just checks for updates.

[ROF]

I believe our IP addresses(a personal piece of identifying information) are transferred with each post here. Has this website told us where this information is collected, how it will be stored, who will have access to it, and how it will be used/misused? Did videohelp disclose that this information would be collected from you each time you post? If not, perhaps most forums on the net should be sued for spying or under one of those legal statutes I asked for and you posted.

Personally, I have accepted that part of the modern lifestyle involves people collecting information about you and what you do. Each time you use your cell phone that information is stored and can be used by third parties without your knowledge. Ever fill out an application to win a prize? Just imagine how many people have made money by that 3x5 card with your name, address, and phone number on it. If you do not believe there are thousands of people with your personal identifying information in thier hands or available to them at the click of a button I'd say you are living in denial.

[Dv8ted2]

I believe our IP addresses(a personal piece of identifying information) are transferred with each post here.

As a network engineer, the IP address is not a end-all be all identifying tool that you are referring to. Until we make the switch to IPV6, there is a shortage of IP numbers and the numbers get recycled.

[ROF]

Incorrect. It is also checking to make sure I have a valid license(checking to make sure I am not a thief using Warez or invalid software) to receive those updates. If not I am cut off and my anti-virus program is shut down, which is exactly what Microsoft should do but hasn't.

Have you ever heard of perpetual licenses?

The software that I use just checks for updates.

Sure, but my anti-virus is good for twelve months only. You original said that I was trying to compare two completely different things. The anti-virus checks my machine for personal identifying information and also it's own serial number registered with their site. The WGA check does the same thing with the only difference is when the WGA went into effect Microsoft did not disclose this. The implementation of the WGA is the only issue I have with Microsoft.

The good thing about this is that WGA will be much stronger in Vista and will hopefully shut down offending systems to prevent people from casually stealing software or abusing software licenses. One thing is for sure. The EULA for Vista will clearly state what and how the WGA will function.

[Dv8ted2]

Incorrect. It is also checking to make sure I have a valid license(checking to make sure I am not a thief using Warez or invalid software) to receive those updates. If not I am cut off and my anti-virus program is shut down, which is exactly what Microsoft should do but hasn't.

Have you ever heard of perpetual licenses?

The software that I use just checks for updates.

Sure, but my anti-virus is good for twelve months only. You original said that I was trying to compare two completely different things. The anti-virus checks my machine for personal identifying information and also it's own serial number registered with their site. The WGA check does the same thing with the only difference is when the WGA went into effect Microsoft did not disclose this. The implementation of the WGA is the only issue I have with Microsoft.

The good thing about this is that WGA will be much stronger in Vista and will hopefully shut down offending systems to prevent people from casually stealing software or abusing software licenses. One thing is for sure. The EULA for Vista will clearly state what and how the WGA will function.

If you are thinking this will stop people then you are deluding yourself. Microsoft has not been able to do anything about enforcing licensing issues dating back to the DOS age. What makes you think Vista will be any different. People have always swapped copies of windows 98 and that trend continues today.

[ROF]

I believe our IP addresses(a personal piece of identifying information) are transferred with each post here.

As a network engineer, the IP address is not a end-all be all identifying tool that you are referring to. Until we make the switch to IPV6, there is a shortage of IP numbers and the numbers get recycled.

Correct. but it is still a piece of identifying information. Surely there are paranoid people posting amongst us. There have been a few in here. Any piece of information which is secretly taken from your own personal computing experience could potentially be considered spying especially when the collection of such information is not clearly stated. As I said, I don't really mind or care because I have accepted the fact that nothing you do is private anymore. It hasn't been private for decades.

[ROF]

While the implementation of this is deplorable I don't see anything wrong with the OS checking in periodically or even daily. Several components installed on my network do this on a daily basis anyways so why can't my OS?

Not everyone is a crook. If you bought your version and it has been approved, there is no need for rechecks.

Please quit with the big brother routine. I do not need someone constantly watching over me.

If you are thinking this will stop people then you are deluding yourself. Microsoft has not been able to do anything about enforcing licensing issues dating back to the DOS age. What makes you think Vista will be any different. People have always swapped copies of windows 98 and that trend continues today.

Interesting. With what you said previously and with what you just posted I think you have answered this question perfectly. Why does Microsoft need to continually check to make sure the installed copy of windows is valid?

[dphirschler]

I don't want any validity check in any of my software, including the OS. It only complicates things and benefits me none. It only benefits Microsoft (in the case of Windows). And I certainly don't want any of my software phoning home. They have no business knowing anything about me after I bought their product. And on top of that I may not have an internet connection on the machine I intend to use the software on.

While I accept that when I download an update to their software they may want to verify my Windows is valid, they have no business checking out my computer's specs. And I have every right to change my machine all around (mobo, hdd, ram, video card) without their knowledge or consent. It's my shit!


Darryl

[ROF]

While I accept that when I download an update to their software they may want to verify my Windows is valid, they have no business checking out my computer's specs. And I have every right to change my machine all around (mobo, hdd, ram, video card) without their knowledge or consent. It's my shit!

Darryl

While I tend to agree with you the fact is the Operating System is separate from your hardware and has terms which you agree to prior to installation. In quite a few cases changing hardware violates those terms and terminates your right to the use of the software. You agreed to that prior to purchase. You believe you have the right but if you read the EULA in most cases you do not have that right.

[Dv8ted2]

While I accept that when I download an update to their software they may want to verify my Windows is valid, they have no business checking out my computer's specs. And I have every right to change my machine all around (mobo, hdd, ram, video card) without their knowledge or consent. It's my shit!

Darryl

While I tend to agree with you the fact is the Operating System is separate from your hardware and has terms which you agree to prior to installation. In quite a few cases changing hardware violates those terms and terminates your right to the use of the software. You agreed to that prior to purchase. You believe you have the right but if you read the EULA in most cases you do not have that right.

Which brings us back to the age-old question, would EULA's stand up in court? You do not see TV manufacturers that tell you you cannot watch different channels or car manufacturers that tell you that you can only drive on certain days.

[ROF]

Which brings us back to the age-old question, would EULA's stand up in court? You do not see TV manufacturers that tell you you cannot watch different channels or car manufacturers that tell you that you can only drive on certain days.

Your analogies are way off. But let's examine them. Read your TV manual. Now open up the back of your television, remove the shielding, alter the signal, and add a different or altered transmission/receiving device. You will now be in violation of the EULA provided by your television manufacturer and would be subject to prosecution by the FCC if you lived in the United States. Read you car manual. Can you remove your catalytic converter because you do not like it? Can you simply remove your muffler because it is causing undertow drag? How about tinting your windows. Can you apply 80% tint to 100% of your cars windows? How about metal shielding? Can you drive a car that has only a 2 x 6 inch driver viewspace. Most states require a front license plate? Can you simply add one of those cute ones people buy at automative stores and remove your registered tag? How about your bumper? Can you fill it with concrete to ensure maximum breakthrough power on impact?

There are laws in place which govern what you can and can't do with just about everything you own. Read the manuals. Every electronics device includes one and every one I have read includes a portion about what you can and can't do before the electronics device violates the terms your agreed to when you plugged it in. All of them would hold up in court.

[RLT69]

In quite a few cases changing hardware violates those terms and terminates your right to the use of the software. You agreed to that prior to purchase. You believe you have the right but if you read the EULA in most cases you do not have that right.

Oh for the love of mike. Are you kidding me?? That's what I call unconscionable and would not stand up in the court of law!

unconscionable
adj. referring to a contract or bargain which is so unfair to a party that no reasonable or informed person would agree to it. In a suit for breach of contract, a court will not enforce an unconscionable contract (award damages or order specific performance) against the person unfairly treated, on the theory that he/she was misled, lacked information or signed under duress or misunderstanding. It is similar to an "adhesion contract," in which one party has taken advantage of a person dealing from weakness.

source: http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=unconscionable&type=1&submit1.x=98&submit...ubmit1=Look+up

Please stop shill-ing for Microsoft.

[ROF]

Oh for the love of mike. Are you kidding me?? That's what I call unconscionable and would not stand up in the court of law!

You can go on believing whatever you wish. If your agreements mean nothing to you I would guess you will not get far in the business world. If you do it's pure luck.

[RLT69]

You can go on believing whatever you wish. If your agreements mean nothing to you I would guess you will not get far in the business world. If you do it's pure luck.

As always divert attention away from your failing argument.

You have not addressed the lawsuits against Microsoft that I provided. Nor have you refuted the claim that Microsoft's EULA by not allowing a user to make hardware changes to their computer is unconscionable.

Again legal defintion for unconscionable can be found here: http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=unconscionable&type=1&submit1.x=98&submit...ubmit1=Look+up

I'm still waiting for sources to back up your claims.

[ROF]

You have not addressed the lawsuits against Microsoft that I provided. Nor have you refuted the claim that Microsoft's EULA by not allowing a user to make hardware changes to their computer is unconscionable.

Do you even read the posts before you type such nonsense? If you had read my posts you would see that I do not necessarily agree with this tactic and I also do not agree with the way the WGA was implemented. I support the WGA. That's it! Nothing more, nothing less. You seem to be drifting off into lawsuits and other such dictonary quoting. I can google too you know?

[RLT69]

Do you even read the posts before you type such nonsense?

Physician heal thyself.

Did you or did you not say

There are laws in place which govern what you can and can't do with just about everything you own. Read the manuals. Every electronics device includes one and every one I have read includes a portion about what you can and can't do before the electronics device violates the terms your agreed to when you plugged it in. All of them would hold up in court.

And

In quite a few cases changing hardware violates those terms and terminates your right to the use of the software. You agreed to that prior to purchase. You believe you have the right but if you read the EULA in most cases you do not have that right.

In these instances the EULA would not hold up in a court of law because it would be considered unconscionable.

If you had read my posts you would see that I do not necessarily agree with this tactic and I also do not agree with the way the WGA was implemented. I support the WGA. That's it!

You have been supporting Microsofts tactics all through your posts. Who are you kiding. You said it's o.k. for Microsoft to phone home daily and to gather information about your system that's not necessary to determine if are a licensed user. Hell you said you EXPECT them to do that.

So please, read your own posts!

[ROF]

You have been supporting Microsofts tactics all through your posts. Who are you kiding. You said it's o.k. for Microsoft to phone home daily and to gather information about your system that's not necessary to determine if are a licensed user. Hell you said you EXPECT them to do that.

It is OK for my OS to phone home daily. They can know anything they want about my systems and my network specs. Why should I care? Maybe they will use that information productively by forecasting what people are buying so they can target optimize the OS for the median specs of their base customers.

My only problem(s) is Microsoft did not tell me about the constant need to phone home and sometimes the WGA(any DRM) will have adverse effects for those honest people out there. If you had read what I have posted you would have seen this. Kinda like security at any department store. Ever been in line when someone is accused of stealing something and they do not have any store products on them? An honest person is accused of stealing. hmmm . . Go Figure!

How easy is it to steal in a store compared to signing up for P2P? You do the math. Shouldn't Microsoft be offered some protection?

[greymalkin]

there seems to be a good bit of naevity going on around here when it comes to what privacy people think they have or what they think they should be entitled to when it comes to owning certain softwares.

If you think people aren't giving away your information daily do yourself a favor and go to www.docusearch.com. For a small fee you can look up anyones social security number, address, bank account numbers.balance..pretty much anything you want to find on a person. They can dig up all that dirt on you because the people who promised your information would remain "confidential" lied. They claim on the website that what they are doing is totally legal.

Nobody likes what ROF is saying..this is quite evident, but however unfair you think what MS is doing or what docusearch is doing..they are still around. You can spout of law after law that you think applies but the reality is enough influence in the form of money or whatever else keeps these things around.

another fun fact: when social security was implemented in the 30's the government promised us that it would never be used as a form of national identification. The social security administration also does not guarantee that you will receive a unique number. How's that for not being right and fair.

Everything is shades of grey and (almost) everyone lies...and gets away with it. Complain all you want, roll your eyes in disbelief. It doesn't change the facts.

Piracy is just snowballing...software companies put a system in place to prevent theft, people find ways around it..stronger copy protection..more sophisticated cracking...untill the software companies do the unthinkable out of desperation. Now you think you have something on them because they are infringing on your rights...invading your privacy? Do you think you have privacy? Do you think you really completely own that operating system to do as you please with it? Is saying "no fair" going to change anything?

Should the software companies give up? Will that end piracy?