Two lawsuits filed against Microsoft over WGA

[Gatticus]

Woot! Figured this was coming. Hope they win.

http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/05/wga/index.php

[MrWizard6600]

psht. seems perfectly fine to me. I would have been suprised if microsoft wasnt doing something like this. as long as it doesnt take up system resources (or if it has to, minute ones), im down with it.

[flynlr]

spyware plain and simple. blocked it with my firewall. I have all Legal SW but do NOT! want a PC calling home without my permission. I bought the SOB and I WILL control what it does..
on the other hand I did to windows activation /// ;)

[MrWizard6600]

does anyone have a registry key/dll/file/process name i can look for? whats this thing called?

[Gatticus]

WgaLogon.dll, WgaTray.exe in the system32 folder.

[Zepher]

spyware plain and simple. blocked it with my firewall. I have all Legal SW but do NOT! want a PC calling home without my permission. I bought the SOB and I WILL control what it does..
on the other hand I did to windows activation /// ;)

Actually, you purchased a license to use/operate the software and are supposed to abide by the EULA when you installed it.

[eeyrjmr]

Actually, you purchased a license to use/operate the software and are supposed to abide by the EULA when you installed it.

and where is this EULA legally binding?
and even if it is WGA was released in July 2005, XP (and thus the EULA) was released?

there is nothing in the EULA that says that MS can install spyware

[OldPueblo]

They do own the OS, you are just licensing it from them. Like leasing a car. :D

[djnes]

there is nothing in the EULA that says that MS can install spyware
Take the tin foil hat off for a second. They aren't installing spyware. It's a simple check to see if you are legal or not. That's it. If you have legit software, why would anyone be so against this? If Microsoft wants to check if my version of XP is legal, they have every right to do so. It seems to me, that there are a lot of software pirates out there, quaking in their parents' basements over this WGA stuff.

When can we drop this issue, and discuss REAL threats to the computing populus?

[LstOfTheBrunnenG]

Ya rly. What's next, are the police going to check to make sure you have a driver's license the next time they pull you over for speeding? :rolleyes:

[eeyrjmr]

Ya rly. What's next, are the police going to check to make sure you have a driver's license the next time they pull you over for speeding? :rolleyes:

actually they do

[-(Xyphox)-]

old news :p
they wont win the 2nd one, might the state lawsuite

[djnes]

What's funny is that the Apple users who are experiencing something similiar, pretty much don't care. If you read through the comments, it's quite easy to spot who has their head one straight and who has their head stuck up their arse.

http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=33959

[br0adband]

The fact that Microsoft owns the operating system on your PC (if you're running Windows, of course) just keeps getting lost in the shuffle as it always does. It's their OS, and they can do pretty much whatever they want with it, especially actions that allow them to not only track and determine if the installation you or anyone else has flat out illegal and therefore protect their property rights, or just do something else - currently that's simply locking people out of Windows Update but they could easily disable an installation without breaking a sweat. It would be a big problem for them to do the total lockdown of a machine, but it is definitely possible and has been since even before XP was released.

It's a complicated blown out of proportion issue, but in the end, it's their OS, so get with the program.

If you don't like it, run some Linux distribution or do something else, but the majority of people should stop bitching about Microsoft's legal position for protecting themselves regardless of your personal opinions about it being right or wrong. You go spend a few hundred billion on research and development and hire programmers and other people to create an operating system and then you can do what you want with it - for now, Microsoft is just trying to cut back the piracy that does run rampant across a great number of installations.

bb

[barryware]

Goggle "RemoveWGA". There are utilities that remove the WGA notification from your machine with no ill effects. I personally don't think it should be an issue. Not too long ago in order to get any additional updates, M$ validated your copy of the OS with their validation update. I think that if it passed the validation, you shouldn't need to download a "notification" utility to help you obtain a legitimate license once validated.

[MrWizard6600]

actually they do

yea... that was the joke.... :rolleyes: nice 1 :D

[Gatticus]

They can't do whatever they want. There are laws about what you can and can't do. The Euro's have already taught Microsoft that fact but Microsoft just don't listen so they are going to teach them again and again until Microsoft gets it. And I already use Linux but I am forced to run XP for my games. That doesn't mean I have to do what Microsoft says. Anyone tested their EULA in a court yet? EULA's are not legally binding unless a court says so.

[OldPueblo]

Actually that whole "I agree to all these terms" checkbox we all check makes it binding. If you didnt check that box, then you didn't receive windows in a legal fashion anyway, though you may not have broken the law. If you installed it yourself, you would have to check that during setup. If you bought a system with Windows pre-installed, upon its first boot you should have to check that box as part of the post-setup completion. If you bought a system that didn't require that upon first boot, the OEM is breaking the law by not setting that up before selling it.

Answer me this, what possible harm does it do to someone using windows legitly? None whatsoever. Everytime you go to windows update you give windows update information about your computer automatically as well. Big deal.

And the Windows Media thing is a shame. So where is Adobe's lawsuit about Paint being bundled? Where is the lawsuit from Creative labs about Voice Recorder and other audio apps being preinstalled? How about Corel regarding WordPad and Notepad? How about Nero and Roxio regarding burning being built into the system now? Adobe again or Ulead regarding Moviemaker? WAIT A MINUTE! Doesn't Apple sell a fully capable OS out of the box that does everything as well! And I have even more limitations on that platform in terms of buying replacement software. But no, Apple's sh** doesn't stink. No monopoly or bandwagon to jump on there, move along.

MS is giving us what we (and think of the old or non-computer literate) want, a fully capable OS out of the box. We can easily choose to not use it. We are not being told to use it or being forced to use it. I guarantee you there are thousands of people in Europe that are going to be annoyed that they have to put Media Player back in because its their music player of choice.

If you can't innovate, sue. That's the message of the day. And I know several people where the WGA thing was the last straw and they are going to buy a legit OS. Mission accomplished.

[GJSNeptune]

Goggle "RemoveWGA". There are utilities that remove the WGA notification from your machine with no ill effects. I personally don't think it should be an issue. Not too long ago in order to get any additional updates, M$ validated your copy of the OS with their validation update. I think that if it passed the validation, you shouldn't need to download a "notification" utility to help you obtain a legitimate license once validated.
http://www.firewallleaktester.com/removewga.htm

With typing skills this poor, I'll pass. What happened to proofreading? This is posted and displayed to the world, only to embarrass themselves.

[Gatticus]

Actually that whole "I agree to all these terms" checkbox we all check makes it binding.

That still doesn't make it legally binding. It's not the same as signing a contract. Most of it is just BS and wouldn't past muster in a court.

[TheDude05]

I dont have a problem with them making sure there software is legit. What I care about is the ill effects these "patches" make to my system. There are tons of posts on microsofts WGA forum about people who have had ill effects after installing WGA updates, including losing their raid array. Thats what I have a problem with.

[br0adband]

They can't do whatever they want. There are laws about what you can and can't do. The Euro's have already taught Microsoft that fact but Microsoft just don't listen so they are going to teach them again and again until Microsoft gets it. And I already use Linux but I am forced to run XP for my games. That doesn't mean I have to do what Microsoft says. Anyone tested their EULA in a court yet? EULA's are not legally binding unless a court says so.

"forced to run XP for my games"

That's the most ridiculously stupid thing you could have possibly said, so thanks. And it's not Microsoft's fault you have to use their OS to run those games: it's the fault of the developers that created them for not releasing them across multiple operating system platforms. "forced" my ass.

And in the US, the EULA is a legally binding document regardless of whether it's been tested in court. Just because it hasn't doesn't nullify your requirement to agree to it and be bound by it. Sooner or later it will be tested in court and I bet it'll stand up. For the money Microsoft spent on creating it, the legal team behind it was pretty damned thorough even with all the boilerplate text.

And I'm not interested in the Euros since I live in the US where the laws are different. What goes in one part of the world doesn't go for all of it.

bb

[Josh_B]

"forced to run XP for my games"

That's the most ridiculously stupid thing you could have possibly said, so thanks. And it's not Microsoft's fault you have to use their OS to run those games: it's the fault of the developers that created them for not releasing them across multiple operating system platforms. "forced" my ass.

Yes - if only because developers refuse to port games to Linux or another OS. Programmers are aware of MS' stranglehold on the market. It's the old chicken and the egg syndrome - money is finite, therefore developers won't spend time on getting games working in another OS. But how does another OS win customers, if their customers are forced to run a certain OS to be compatible. Unless MS opens up their APIs, it will be pretty near to impossible to get a app to be 100% supported in an alternative OS.

Look at it this way: MS is very good at creating the GUI and their implementation of a modular kernel is quite good. (It could be better in memory management, but hey, there are many improvements in Vista!) The GUI is extremely intuitive... their user interfaces are *the best*, bar none amongst all GUI contenders. Sad to say, but even my beloved Gnome is a horrible mess as compared to the XP shell. :-)

[Josh_B]

I dont have a problem with them making sure there software is legit. What I care about is the ill effects these "patches" make to my system. There are tons of posts on microsofts WGA forum about people who have had ill effects after installing WGA updates, including losing their raid array. Thats what I have a problem with.

I don't think the assumption that your customers are criminals is acceptable - do you want to be submitted to a criminal check each time you update?

[OldPueblo]

Its not an assumption because there are probably more illegal installs then legal ones not taking businesses into account. By far.

And are you sure your RAID array didn't disappear with a windows update driver update to your Silicon image RAID driver? :p

[general]

OldPueblo,

They were found to be a legal monopoly so your post is wrong.

[OldPueblo]

OldPueblo,

They were found to be a legal monopoly so your post is wrong.

That makes no sense, you'll need to type a bit more to make a point.

[Gatticus]

That's the most ridiculously stupid thing you could have possibly said, so thanks. And it's not Microsoft's fault you have to use their OS to run those games: it's the fault of the developers that created them for not releasing them across multiple operating system platforms. "forced" my ass.

And in the US, the EULA is a legally binding document regardless of whether it's been tested in court. Just because it hasn't doesn't nullify your requirement to agree to it and be bound by it. Sooner or later it will be tested in court and I bet it'll stand up. For the money Microsoft spent on creating it, the legal team behind it was pretty damned thorough even with all the boilerplate text.

And I'm not interested in the Euros since I live in the US where the laws are different. What goes in one part of the world doesn't go for all of it.

bb

If a game I want is only on Windows then I have no choice but to use Windows. Can I make it any simpler for you?

Local laws take precedence over any EULA, even Microsoft agrees with that fact. It's up to the court to interpret an EULA.


20. APPLICABLE LAW. If you acquired this Software in the United States, this EULA is governed by the laws of the State of Washington. If you acquired this Software in Canada, unless expressly prohibited by local law, this EULA is governed by the laws in force in the Province of Ontario, Canada; and, in respect of any dispute which may arise hereunder, you consent to the jurisdiction of the federal and provincial courts sitting in Toronto, Ontario. If you acquired this Software in the European Union, Iceland, Norway, or Switzerland, then local law applies. If you acquired this Software in any other country, then local law may apply.

21. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; SEVERABILITY. This EULA (including any addendum or amendment to this EULA which is included with the Software) is the entire agreement between you and Microsoft relating to the Software and the support services (if any) and they supersede all prior or contemporaneous oral or written communications, proposals and representations with respect to the Software or any other subject matter covered by this EULA. To the extent the terms of any Microsoft policies or programs for support services conflict with the terms of this EULA, the terms of this EULA shall control. If any provision of this EULA is held to be void, invalid, unenforceable or illegal, the other provisions shall continue in full force and effect.

The first-sale doctrine as it relates to computer software is an area of legal confusion. Software publishers claim the first-sale doctrine does not apply because software is licensed, not sold, under the terms of an End User License Agreement (EULA). The courts have issued contrary decisions regarding the first-sale rights of consumers. Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell and Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus are two US Supreme Court cases that deal with copyright holders trying to enforce terms beyond the scope of copyright and patent, but calling it a license. Many state courts have also ruled that a sale of software is indeed a sale of goods under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) at the point where funds are exchanged for the physical copy of the software. The licensed and not sold argument is held mostly in the 8th and 7th Circuits while other circuits tend to support the opposite, thus leading to conflicting court opinions such as seen in the 3rd Circuit Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology and fifth circuit Vault Corp. v. Quaid Software as opposed to the 8th Circuit Blizzard v. BNETD (Davidson & Associates v. Internet Gateway Inc (2004)), which have not been resolved by the Supreme Court.

Federal district courts in California and Texas have issued decisions applying the doctrine of first sale for bundled computer software in Softman v. Adobe (2001) and Novell, Inc. v. CPU Distrib., Inc. (2000) even if the software contains a EULA prohibiting resale. In the Softman case, after purchasing bundled software (A box containing many programs that are also available individually) from Adobe Systems, Softman unbundled it and then resold the component programs. The court ruled that Softman could resell the bundled software, no matter what the EULA stipulates, because Softman had never assented to the EULA. Specifically, the ruling decreed that software purchases be treated as sales transactions, rather than explicit license agreements. In other words, the court ruling argued that California consumers should have the same rights they would enjoy under existing copyright legislation when buying a CD or a book.

In a more recent case involving software EULA's and first-sale rights [Davidson & Associates v. Internet Gateway Inc (2004)][3], the US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri issued a ruling which appears to contradict the position of the district courts in California and Texas. The first sale reasoning of the Softman court was challenged, with the court ruling "The first sale doctrine is only triggered by an actual sale. Accordingly, a copyright owner does not forfeit his right of distribution by entering into a licensing agreement." In addition, the court found the plaintiff's EULA, which prohibited resale, was binding on the defendants because "The defendants .. expressly consented to the terms of the EULA and Terms of Use by clicking 'I Agree' and 'Agree.'" This runs counter to Softman v. Adobe. The difference in these rulings has yet to be resolved by a higher court.

Microsoft was countersued in Microsoft Corp v. Zamos (Case: 5:04-cv-02504) for violating the Clayton Act. In Microsoft v. Zamos, after unsuccessfully trying to return legally acquired unopened copies of Microsoft Software purchased at a student bookstore, as specified in the Microsoft EULA, Zamos sold the software on EBay for a profit of $140.00 . Microsoft investigators sent a message to Zamos, through eBay's website, asking whether the disk containing the software included the phrase "not for retail or OEM distribution." Zamos confirmed by return email the same day that the disk did include the phrase. Microsoft then sued Zamos claiming that "Microsoft has suffered and will continue to suffer substantial and irreparable damage to its business reputation and goodwill as well as losses in an amount not yet ascertained... Defendant's acts of copyright infringement have caused Microsoft irreparable injury." and sought legal fees and the profit from the sale.

Zamos responded on Jan 3, 2005 by countersuing Microsoft with Clayton Act charges and further charged that, "Microsoft purposely established and maintained a sales and distribution system whereby rightful rejection and return of merchandise that is substantially non-conforming is either impossible or practically impossible due to the ineptness of its employees, unconscionable policies, malicious intent and deceptive practices," thus engaging in fraud and violating the Consumer Sales Practice Act.

Microsoft offered to drop the case when local Ohio papers carried the story. Zamos however refused to drop the case until Microsoft apologized and paid for the cost of copies of legal documents at the local copy shop. In March 2005, Microsoft and Zamos agreed to a settlement, which included a non-disclosure agreement with regards to the settlement terms.



"What goes in one part of the world doesn't go for all of it."

Ding, ding, ding!

[dagon11985]

That still doesn't make it legally binding. It's not the same as signing a contract. Most of it is just BS and wouldn't past muster in a court.

You're right. You don't have to use Windows, no one is holding a gun to your head. You don't like what Microsoft does or says, then don't use their OS. Plain and simple.

[Gatticus]

I would gladly stop using it if all my games worked on another OS. They don't though!

[jimmyb]

And in the US, the EULA is a legally binding document regardless of whether it's been tested in court. Just because it hasn't doesn't nullify your requirement to agree to it and be bound by it. Sooner or later it will be tested in court and I bet it'll stand up. For the money Microsoft spent on creating it, the legal team behind it was pretty damned thorough even with all the boilerplate text.


Let me start by saying IANAL.

Aside from the incredibly shaky legal ground EULAs stand on, there are many restrictions on what is an acceptable and enforcable contract (let alone a EULA). Retroactively changing the contract is one of those things, which tends to happen a lot with EULAs. Attempting to enforce a contract that the signer has not actually read is another (again, quite common with EULAs). Finally, a contract can not subvert local law or policy.

I make a point of explicitly disagreeing with the EULA before I click the yes button, preferably with a witness present.

Software that automatically reports information back home, without the option to turn it off, that could potentially disable the computer, sounds an awful lot like spy/malware to me. Particularly since you can't turn it off.

And there are laws against that.

[korpse]

I make a point of explicitly disagreeing with the EULA before I click the yes button, preferably with a witness present.
lol, thats actually pretty funny. I usually get a retarded midget circus clown to click the yes button while I'm not looking....what EULA???

[nhusby]

The EULA states that the EULA is legally binding. I didnt read that... I read "scroll down really really fast, then click this." no judge or jury is going to expect anyone on a personal computer to read every word of every eula before clicking ok. Any self respecting judge would throw the eula out based solely on that fact. Ever hear about the guy who signed a contract saying the other guy could shoot him? (it happend around here, some dumb ass wanted to know what it felt like to get shot) It was thrown out and the guy got murder. Its the same as beware of dog signs, if you have a beware of dog sign, and your dog bites someone, its just proof that you knew the dog would bite, making you neglegant.

EULA's are bs, intended to scare you.

[Servant of Shodan]

The sad reality is that M$ truly does not care if their EULA is legal or not. By virtue of you having selected [Yes] or [I agree] and using the operating system you are by default agreeing to the EULA. If they included a clause that allows Steve Ballmer to come over to your house and demand you perform oral sex on him…it wouldn’t matter. At this moment M$ has over 30 billion dollars sitting in cash. That means that they can do anything they want. It doesn’t matter if it is illegal. Don’t you all remember the 5+ year-long antitrust lawsuit brought on by multiple govt bodies from a few years back? Microsoft laughed it off and just stalled the process, taking up millions upon millions of tax dollars. They could afford to keep paying their lawyers whatever it took, while the government didn’t have an unlimited budget for legal fees. State after state dropped their cases due to continually rising costs, and in the end, Microsoft’s “punishment” was that they gave coupons out to people good towards their next purchase of Windows!!!
So the bottom line is, the EULA is total garbage, absolutely against fair use laws, gives every conceivable benefit to Microsoft, allows for total invasion of privacy. The EULA is bad for people - Microsoft knows it, the EU & US know it, Japan knows, Korea knows it, it everybody knows it, but it doesn’t matter. Microsoft has the money and that is all that matters.

[-=ABUSIVE-69=-]

i do not have a legit copy of windows, and i am proud! i will remove WGA the first chance i get. every1 sould all band together and just not use windows anymore, use linux. then all the developers will make their shit for linux, and we will all be happy :)

[nhusby]

I have a lagit copy of XP on my laptop, because it came with it... I also have a lagit copy of win2k3 on my other rig because I got it from school. Truth be told, I wouldnt pay for more than 1 copy of windows. If I have any complaint, its that MS changed their license from per user to per machine... I personaly think MS does good work and deserves to get paid for it. I dont however appreciate re-buying the same product. I'll buy a copy of Vista. A single copy...

[nhusby]

i do not have a legit copy of windows, and i am proud! i will remove WGA the first chance i get. every1 sould all band together and just not use windows anymore, use linux. then all the developers will make their shit for linux, and we will all be happy :)

you do realize, that by pirating windows you are actually supporting the windows platform? Every computer out there that has a pirated copy of windows is another machine that is compatible with products made for lagitimate copies of windows. Thus making windows a much better platform for developers, because although you might not pay MS for windows, you'll pay Ubisoft for their games (most likely). And because you pay them, they will make more games for windows, wich will help sell windows to lagitimate buyers.

[OldPueblo]

Excellent point. :D ^^^

i do not have a legit copy of windows, and i am proud! i will remove WGA the first chance i get. every1 sould all band together and just not use windows anymore, use linux. then all the developers will make their shit for linux, and we will all be happy :)

Just one problem. I like windows. I also like MS. A lot. I agree with their vision. There are many like me that are not on the "I'm cool because I hate MS" bandwagon. Say what you will, no argument can ever beat the fact that more people simply like Windows then don't. The day it no longer is the most often used operating system will be the day that changes. Not before.

[k1pp3r]

I don't think the assumption that your customers are criminals is acceptable - do you want to be submitted to a criminal check each time you update?

WGA is pretty much the same as a police man asking for insurance, or a background check when you get a new job. nothin wrong with it unless it starts borking legit installs of windows. The only OS i really have not used is mac OS, i've used linux,unix and i prefer windows and don't care about taking 5 seconds of my life to say "hey i bought and supported your product now let me have my updates" Face it, whatever you do this day in age peoples first assumption of you is that you are trying to rip them of something or trying to steal their identity thats the world we live in. When you offer someone something free what is the reaction you get most likely "ok whats the catch" or "why didn't i get this sooner or with my original item" (example HL2 deathmatch comes to mind)

Sad but its true

[GreNME]

OldPueblo,

They were found to be a legal monopoly so your post is wrong.
No, you are wrong. They were found guilty of practices that were monopolistic, fined, and forced to alter their business practices. So, regardless of the legal issues between MS and the guv'ment, OldPueblo is totally correct.

As has been pointed out earlier, Apple has been doing this for far longer, and yet the Mac zealots in the original poster's article seem to ignore that little tidbit. If either lawsuit is successful, then Apple should get the same treatment. Of the three most popular-- Windows, OS X, and Linux-- only Linux doesn't have this problem only because they have a different licensing model (in other words: apples and oranges).

i do not have a legit copy of windows, and i am proud! i will remove WGA the first chance i get. every1 sould all band together and just not use windows anymore, use linux. then all the developers will make their shit for linux, and we will all be happy :)
As has already been pointed out: if you are using the Windows OS, whether legit or not, you are supporting the Windows platform. Every Windows-based program you run, that has been developed for Windows by companies who benefit from running on Windows, is effectively supporting the Windows platform. The more you run programs on Windows, the more developers are going to give you stuff that runs on Windows.

In other words, your own hypocrisy is pretty much making your little rant null and void.

Speaking of hypocrisy:The sad reality is that M$ blah blah blah At this moment M$ blah blah blah antitrust lawsuit blah blah blah EULA is total garbage, blah blah blah
The most ironic part of this post is that I would bet money it was posted from a Windows machine. How does the hypocrisy taste?
http://image.grenme.com/thread/anti-ms.gif (http://www.penny-arcade.com/)

Welcome to antipiracy, people. This is what happens when too many assholes pirate software. Start blaming the dicks who feel entitled to not pay for the software, which is what keeps it at the current prices instead of being more affordable. I don't like the prices of a lot of software out there, either, but as long as there are jerks who decide it's okay to disregard licenses that the software companies use as one of their excuses to keep "cost of distribution" so high, then things won't change.

For every software at home that I can't afford or cannot get a true free license (and MS has given me many free licenses), then I use open-source software. For some things at work (I am an IT Manager), open-source licensing allows my company to have technology features that would otherwise be prohibitively expensive with proprietary. At both work and home I still mainly use Windows, but there is no rule out there that states that one must be either/or with regard to open-source software. I support it where I can or where it is realistic and feasible, and I use proprietary software for everything else. Because I've approached my computing like that, I have not been burned by Microsoft yet, and have actually gotten free stuff from Microsoft, often for simply letting them give me a sales pitch.

Give it a try, people. Proprietary and open-source software works surprisingly well together, and is a good way to save all this money people are bitching about. Just spend the money on what you need, and for everyone it will be slightly different. You will be happy with the results, and for those of you bitching about Microsoft you get the opportunity to be less hypocritical with your whining.

[rhexis]

its funny reading all these anti wga posts and ms is evil rants. if you dont agree with ms protecting their ip then dont use their products. it couldnt be any more simple than that. why not join the other few hundred cool people using linux? just think, instead of playing games on xp you can spend a few hours trying to get your sound card to work or maybe even figuring out how to make linux recognize your printer.

[OldPueblo]

LOL nice. :D ^^^^

Microsoft Windows XP Home With SP2 - $88
Microsoft Windows XP Professional With SP2 - $138

$88 / 48 months (how long XP has been avail) = $1.83 per month
$138 / 48 months (how long XP has been avail) = $2.87 per month
$88 / 12 months (in case you just came late to XP) = $7.33 per month

Yeah thats like barely beer money, one movie a month, etc. I don't know about you guys, but for something that I use every single day thats a hard price to beat. :D Hardly an excuse to pirate something that gives you so much bang for buck. Where's the evil MS now? I got my money's worth and then some. Actually I got my copy of XP Pro for free from an MS seminar years ago that anyone couldve attended. :D

[Alias2]

I hope MS burns on this one. I had a customer call and rip my head off a few days ago. She claims I ripped her off, and her software isn't "Genuine". Thanks Bill! Can't even get the anti-piracy software right.

[Newsboys2004]

WGA is pretty much the same as a police man asking for insurance, or a background check when you get a new job. nothin wrong with it unless it starts borking legit installs of windows. The only OS i really have not used is mac OS, i've used linux,unix and i prefer windows and don't care about taking 5 seconds of my life to say "hey i bought and supported your product now let me have my updates" Face it, whatever you do this day in age peoples first assumption of you is that you are trying to rip them of something or trying to steal their identity thats the world we live in. When you offer someone something free what is the reaction you get most likely "ok whats the catch" or "why didn't i get this sooner or with my original item" (example HL2 deathmatch comes to mind)

Sad but its true

Actually you guys don't seem to realize that you already GET CHECKED... when you first install Windows.

When was the last time you guys get checked for your drivers liscense every time you drive? Think before you post.

WGA is none of this your trying to make it into, in reality, I'd say it's more like... Gastepo.

[AreEss]

its funny reading all these anti wga posts and ms is evil rants. if you dont agree with ms protecting their ip then dont use their products. it couldnt be any more simple than that. why not join the other few hundred cool people using linux? just think, instead of playing games on xp you can spend a few hours trying to get your sound card to work or maybe even figuring out how to make linux recognize your printer.

And this is the typical ignorant rhetoric that screams shill.

Let's take a theoretical here. Let's say you buy a new car. Now every day that car tells the manufacturer and police exactly where you drive by GPS. And every time you drive somewhere else, the cops put out an APB on your car as stolen, and swam cop cars around you with guns drawn because you took the scenic route. Oh, and nobody told you that it did any of this.

So I tell you what, rhexis. I'm giong to go take your SSN, your Visa numbers, your address, and some other information that I won't tell you about, and I'm not going to tell you. And I'm going to do something with them, but I won't tell you what. Maybe I'll go on a shopping spree. Maybe I'll sell 'em to spammers and direct marketing people. Maybe I'll pass them on to the CIA and NSA. How do you like that?

What's that? You don't? Then you'd best not defend WGA.

Microsoft still has not disclosed what exact data it transmitted, where that data is stored, or what they have done with that data.

[Servant of Shodan]

your own hypocrisy is pretty much making your little rant null and void

Dude, talk about hypocrisy and ranting! Where are you IT manager, People’s Republik of Mikrosoft, that you can’t tolerate others saying they don’t like Microsoft’s business practices? Of course you’re in love with MS, they’ve given you all sorts of free shit (ensuring your eternal blind loyalty), why you’re practically attached at the penis to Microsoft.
By the way, I AM typing this on a computer with WinXP. Microsoft has made decent OSs, and I have no problem with that aspect of the company. What I know, and every other person should know, is that their business practices and corporate behavior stink! They are overly monopolistic, they have repeatedly bullied other companies, and routinely violate the law. The WGA is just another event in a whole chain. It’s about them blatantly calling the shots, saying to the world they will do anything they want, check up on anybody they want, anytime they want, and daring anybody else to say otherwise. ‘Cause they’ve got the $$$$$$.

[OldPueblo]

Dude, talk about hypocrisy and ranting! Where are you IT manager, People’s Republik of Mikrosoft, that you can’t tolerate others saying they don’t like Microsoft’s business practices? Of course you’re in love with MS, they’ve given you all sorts of free shit (ensuring your eternal blind loyalty), why you’re practically attached at the penis to Microsoft.
By the way, I AM typing this on a computer with WinXP. Microsoft has made decent OSs, and I have no problem with that aspect of the company. What I know, and every other person should know, is that their business practices and corporate behavior stink! They are overly monopolistic, they have repeatedly bullied other companies, and routinely violate the law. The WGA is just another event in a whole chain. It’s about them blatantly calling the shots, saying to the world they will do anything they want, check up on anybody they want, anytime they want, and daring anybody else to say otherwise. ‘Cause they’ve got the $$$$$$.

Hmmm...sounds like dozens and dozens of other companies out there. You act like thats out of the norm, and you assume the glass is half empty and that its all some conspiracy to take over the world or something. When in fact it makes perfect sense what they are doing, and as far as Im concerend they do have every right to do it.

[Pepster64]

I don't have a problem with Microsoft wanting to see if I have a legit copy of Windows, the problem I have is the pain in the neck WGA did to one of my computers. I had to re-install Windows XP on one of my computers and when I went to update my computer WGA notified me that it had to check to see my Windows XP was legit or not (it's definitely legit). To make a long story short I had a bugger of a time getting WGA to validate my copy of windows.

I don't blame Microsoft totally for this, I put a good part of the blame who do use illegal copies of Windows XP. I know this person at work who undercuts me all the time and gets all the computer builds from fellow employees at work, because he's installing an illlegal copy of Windows on the computers he's building. When they start having problems (they usually do) I just direct them to the person who built the computer for it's his mess to begin with. Sorry, I was going off topic a little bit, anyways if it wasn't for the knuckle head at work I could make a lot of people at work very happy with their new computer. However, they look at the cost and the first thing they say "Well, I go with him because he can build it cheaper". I usually say "Well, I won't go down in price because I not going to put a illegal copy of windows on the computer" and I explain to them the advantages of have a legit OS to them. However, money talks and they usually say "I don't care I'll take my chances with him". I just tell them when they start having problems with the computer don't come to me. It's actually funny to see them sulking a few months later when they come up to me and say "I'm having such and such problem with my computer". I just point to the person who they should talk to and walk away.

[nhusby]

I like the products M$ makes, and I think they do a good job at making them. if you want to start throwing anti-trust crap at them, then just for a second look at it from the glass is half full side of the story... M$ is being sued for making it's products too good...
I have valid copies of XP, and server 2003. I also have a couple pirate copys of XP. I also use linux.

back on topic... I dont think WGA has ANY effect on people pirating windows. Most of the people who pirate software know what they are doing. You dont steal a car, then take it back to the dealership for service, so you dont pirate windows and go to MS for updates... The people who get jimmied are the ones who bought the stolen car and took it to the dealership... People who buy computers with pirated OSs on them are the ones who get screwed... Its not M$'s fault, its the fault of the asshole that sold pirated software to someone who didnt understand what it meant. I have pirated copies of XP, and I NEVER update them from MS, anyone that knows they have non-legit software, if not a complete idiot, should'nt have even known this was happening until reading about it... I didnt...

[Gatticus]

its funny reading all these anti wga posts and ms is evil rants. if you dont agree with ms protecting their ip then dont use their products. it couldnt be any more simple than that. why not join the other few hundred cool people using linux? just think, instead of playing games on xp you can spend a few hours trying to get your sound card to work or maybe even figuring out how to make linux recognize your printer.

I've already been using Linux for years so don't need your condescending bollocks. You obviously don't understand, or care, about the real issue at hand. Let me clarify the issue for you.

In fact, the class action lawsuit against Microsoft, in addition to alleging violations of the Washington State and California deceptive and unfair trade practices statutes, alleges that the WGA software violates the Washington State anti-spyware law which makes it a crime to:

(1) Induce an owner or operator to install a computer software component onto the computer by intentionally misrepresenting the extent to which installing the software is necessary for security or privacy reasons or in order to open, view, or play a particular type of content; and

(2) Deceptively cause the execution on the computer of a computer software component with the intent of causing the owner or operator to use the component in a manner that violates any other provision of this section.

The lawsuit also alleges a violation of the California anti-spyware statute which also says that you cannot:
(1) Induce an authorised user to install a software component onto the computer by intentionally misrepresenting that installing software is necessary for security or privacy reasons or in order to open, view, or play a particular type of content.

(2) Deceptively causing the copying and execution on the computer of a computer software component with the intent of causing an authorized user to use the component in a way that violates any other provision of this section.

Remember the Sony rootkit fiasco? How is WGA any different? Oh, it's Microsofts OS so they can do as they please. Like fuck they can.

[GreNME]

And this is the typical ignorant rhetoric that screams shill.

Let's take a theoretical here. Let's say you buy a new car. Now every day that car tells the manufacturer and police exactly where you drive by GPS. And every time you drive somewhere else, the cops put out an APB on your car as stolen, and swam cop cars around you with guns drawn because you took the scenic route. Oh, and nobody told you that it did any of this.
This is the typical ignorant rhetoric that screams completely unaware of how any technology works.

So I tell you what, rhexis. I'm giong to go take your SSN, your Visa numbers, your address, and some other information that I won't tell you about, and I'm not going to tell you. And I'm going to do something with them, but I won't tell you what. Maybe I'll go on a shopping spree. Maybe I'll sell 'em to spammers and direct marketing people. Maybe I'll pass them on to the CIA and NSA. How do you like that?

What's that? You don't? Then you'd best not defend WGA.
WGA does not know your credit card numbers. WGA does not know where you live. WGA does not even know your name, or even the computer's name. WGA does not know the IP address you are connected from. All WGA does is run the same activation check as is done when you first install Windows, nothing more. All of your paranoia and horribly incorrect analogies are not going to change that. Microsoft isn't keeping some database of names and activities. You are confusing Microsoft with the NSA on that mark.

Microsoft still has not disclosed what exact data it transmitted, where that data is stored, or what they have done with that data.
They have disclosed as much as they have disclosed with the activation scheme, and that is enough. There is no reason to wear the tin-foil hat, because this is not a conspiracy where the greys have infiltrated our minds or some goofy crap.

Dude, talk about hypocrisy and ranting! Where are you IT manager, People’s Republik of Mikrosoft, that you can’t tolerate others saying they don’t like Microsoft’s business practices? Of course you’re in love with MS, they’ve given you all sorts of free shit (ensuring your eternal blind loyalty), why you’re practically attached at the penis to Microsoft.
Ahh, the good old "flame them when they catch me in a contradiction" defense from you. Very good. Go ahead and attack me when you have no defense for your hypocrisy. You pretty much call Microsoft the Great Satan, and what OS are you typing on? That's right, a Microsoft OS. Attacking me or trying to come up with some fiction about my life or my job does not change the fact that you admit to your hypocrisy.

By the way, I AM typing this on a computer with WinXP.
Then that means you have agreed to the EULA, which means you have agreed to let them use WGA and other anti-piracy measures ahead of time. You seem to not understand this. Those of us who actually read the EULA already know this, which is why we're not screaming at the sky like you.

Microsoft has made decent OSs, and I have no problem with that aspect of the company. What I know, and every other person should know, is that their business practices and corporate behavior stink! They are overly monopolistic, they have repeatedly bullied other companies, and routinely violate the law. The WGA is just another event in a whole chain. It’s about them blatantly calling the shots, saying to the world they will do anything they want, check up on anybody they want, anytime they want, and daring anybody else to say otherwise. ‘Cause they’ve got the $$$$$$.
Do you have to try really hard to pretty much spout nothing but rhetoric and catch phrases like that? What you pretty much said is the typical circular argument of "they are an evil corporations, and corporations are evil." That's a fine argument for some pre-teen who gets all of their information on how the world works from pop music and MTV, but for us adults who have to operate in the real world, your "corporate blah blah money blah blah monopoly blah blah" ranting has to make a little more sense, and you are failing miserably on that mark.

Yes, Microsoft is a corporation. If you don't like corporations, then you should pretty much go live in a desert or the middle of a jungle, because corporations make the consumer-whore life you live possible (all of us in the US are consumer whores).

Yes, Microsoft was found guilty of monopolistic practices, and then forced to alter their practices. One of the biggest pains in my ass have been the slightly-changing licensing programs through MS, but I also acknowledge that the reason they keep changing ever-so-slightly is because they are forced to comply with government regulations (in this country and elsewhere). If they weren't working to comply, Microsoft would currently be closed down.

There is no conspiracy going on here. Microsoft got in trouble for their behavior before, and now they are trying to play the CYA game with their anti-piracy operations. I can see both the good and bad in it, but trying to demonize a whole company because of WGA is a stupid rhetorical tactic to use. This is definitely going to initially cause some bugginess in a few cases, and it is forcing people like me to make sure proper SUS systems are in place (which should be anyway).

You sign away some of your privacy when you get a cell phone service. You sign away some of your privacy when you get an internet connection. You sign away some of your privacy when you sign a credit card agreement with a bank (make no mistake: credit card == bank account). For everyone who is able to read this page on the web, a whole laundry list of things had to take place that, in a very realistic way, has taken very important information about you (or your parents, in many cases) and shared them with a corporate entity. This happens or else you don't get the services they provide-- that's a whole hell of a lot of trust to put into a group of companies who are not always the most trustworthy (just look at the NSA-ATT-Verizon debacle).

The interesting thing is that Microsoft isn't even requiring as much information as your ISP requires, and yet people are getting all up in arms and accusing Microsoft of being the next Nazi Party. Your telephone company knows more about you and your account info than Microsoft ever will, but people are going to rail on Microsoft and spout "monopoly" as their reason (nevermind the telecos' behavior). When you place an order on Amazon, you are giving away more personal information than Microsoft is going to require with WGA.

Guys, when installing Windows you don't get prompted for a credit card number. You don't even get prompted for your name (or address). When you install Windows it doesn't need to know your phone number. At no point ever does the installation of Windows require your Social Security number. On an almost daily basis, people are required to supply those things for many reasons, but never to operate Windows. So, all of the conspiracy theorists who are claiming all kinds of information being sent to Microsoft are not only full of shit, but they are outright lying. Windows has no access to such information. The most WGA could report would be the machine profile, which would be a unique hash based on component IDs of hardware on your system. However, such a hash wouldn't even be identifiable to you specifically, because enough similar hardware configurations exist so as to make them virtually indistinguishable, and your name, address, and personal info is not transmitted in the first place.

I could do a lot more with your identity if I had your phone number than I could do if I had your machine configuration, and yet I bet most of you give your phone number out to people every day.

[k1pp3r]

Great post GreNME, it seems like there are more important things that people should be worried about than WGA and trying to take action against. For example all the current data thefts that have happened in the past months that can do a million times more damage to you and your family than WGA will ever do. At the current point if WGA fails to authenticate you what happens, you don't get your update? Where as you idently SS# address, CC#'s, birthdate were just stolen form say comcast or the likes. (EDIT: or share with the NSA willingly)

WGA is a simple check to make sure you installed and are running a clean windows install like GreNME said nothing more, go worry about something more important please

[odoe]

This is a civil discussion and all, but DO NOT post on how you steal software. I don't care and no one else does, so you can keep it to yourself. It also violates the rules of the forum and you can end up losing your posting privelidges here. I'll see to that.

[Gatticus]

A simple check, eh? Read this complete article and then tell me it's a simple check.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/07/07/wga_disadvantage/

[Crosshairs]

It seems to me, that there are a lot of software pirates out there, quaking in their parents' basements over this WGA stuff.




LMFAO.....Yeah, that would be the day ....

This, as with most of the "checks" MS puts in, only serves to annoy the legit users, The "Pirates" have long since found a work around ...And will continue to use the software however they see fit.

[OldPueblo]

LMFAO.....Yeah, that would be the day ....

This, as with most of the "checks" MS puts in, only serves to annoy the legit users, The "Pirates" have long since found a work around ...And will continue to use the software however they see fit.

Crap you figured it out. Their sole purpose in this industry is to annoy legit users. I'm surprised they've stayed in business so long with that mentality. :rolleyes:

And that article is pretty much pointless as are most anti-wga posts in this thread. Microsoft does go for the seller of the illegal operating systems, there are plenty of opportunities where MS asks you to rat them out. They even did have a program where you could get a legit copy of windows for free if you ratted out the douce that sold you the illegal one. They are doing what they can with what they have, and making more money is really not at the heart of it. Protecting their intellectual property is.

Open up my computer if you are using Windows XP and click Help. What do you see? An option to check to see if this version of Windows is legal. That may have been added to XP later, but most will have it.

Go download the new (and FREE) Windows Defender. What does it ask you before you download it? It takes that opportunity to check to see if you are valid. If you aren't it asks you to rat out your pirates. Its a perfect method for a company to give people the chance to do this without forcing it on them. Then later as the process ramps up its time to get more forcefull. EVEN then you don't have to install WGA, it cannot be forced on you. If yo chose to have all updates automatically install, then that was your call wasn't it? As far as I'm concerned it is a security update. It tells you that you need a legal copy of Windows, and if you don't have one you won't be enjoying all the security stuff that Windows has to offer. :D

[Servant of Shodan]

...people are getting all up in arms and accusing Microsoft of being the next Nazi Party.
What do you mean the NEXT nazi party? They're already at it, look!!
http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/20/gatesnazi9pr.th.jpg (http://img98.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gatesnazi9pr.jpg)
But seriously, there are a couple of people here who seem to think that because Microsoft is a corporation that therefore anything they do towards gaining profitability is good, holy, and acceptable. There are plenty of ethical, prosperous companies out there who make great products, but don’t behave so belligerently. Tell me what is so frightening to you about speaking out against the belligerent business practices of Microsoft.
This is the typical ignorant rhetoric that screams completely unaware of how any technology works. WGA does not know your credit card numbers. WGA does not know where you live. WGA does not .....rant rant rant rant rant....
I could do a lot more with your identity if I had your phone number than I could do if I had your machine configuration, and yet I bet most of you give your phone number out to people every day.

Dude, you are just whacked out, and need some help. Taking a closer look at your sig though explains a lot: "-There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles.- "

[GreNME]

What do you mean the NEXT nazi party? They're already at it, look!!
http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/20/gatesnazi9pr.th.jpg (http://img98.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gatesnazi9pr.jpg)
Ahh, again with the personal attacks when you have no real argument. Besides, you should have pasted Steve Ballmer's face there, since he's the big prick at Microsoft that decides and green-lights Microsoft practices.

In the spirit of picturing the "other side" of the debate, I already posted a picture for you:
http://image.grenme.com/thread/anti-ms.gif

But seriously, there are a couple of people here who seem to think that because Microsoft is a corporation that therefore anything they do towards gaining profitability is good, holy, and acceptable. There are plenty of ethical, prosperous companies out there who make great products, but don’t behave so belligerently. Tell me what is so frightening to you about speaking out against the belligerent business practices of Microsoft.
You are becoming increasingly nonsensical. There are people in this forum-- myself included-- who happen to work for a living in the real world that you have become so separated from. In that real world, companies work for their own best interests. There is not a company out there who doesn't look out for their own best interest. There is nothing holy about it, and it isn't always acceptable (hence federal regulations, which were enacted in Microsoft's case), but profits are a good thing for the company trying to make one. You are confusing "making a profit" with "only being profitable to shareholders," I think. Looking out for only the board is definitely a bad thing, and does jack shit to help make a company better. So far, as long as Gates (who is the number one philanthropist in the world, by the way... when was the last time you gave to charity?) has been Chairman, the company's direction has been toward company-wide profit. I agree that bullying was wrong, and I'm glad they were slapped for it.

However, misguided demonizers like yourself who want something for nothing can't seem to separate the bad from the good in the case of any company or individual. If someone or something disagrees with your ill-gotten assumption, you automatically invoke Godwin's Law and equate the "other side" with evil. Maybe when you grow up and aren't living off mommy and/or daddy's resources you will find the world isn't so easily split up.

Dude, you are just whacked out, and need some help. Taking a closer look at your sig though explains a lot:
The fact that the signature is a quote from a book and that you missed that it was from a book explains a lot about you. Maybe you should think about sitting down in front of a bound piece of literature for a few hours instead of posting nonsense on bulletin boards. Some of us don't need to wag an e-wang by posting system specs.

You have managed to get through nearly a whole page and have, as of yet, still not refuted the plain facts that WGA is no different from WPA, nor have you provided any good and logical reasoning as to why WGA breaks any legal agreement between a licenser and a licensee. This is exactly the reason why these court cases are going to experience nothing but trouble, and why they are probably going to lose.

[GreNME]

A simple check, eh? Read this complete article and then tell me it's a simple check.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/07/07/wga_disadvantage/
1. The Register is the worst source to use for information about computing. They have, on many occasions, simply posted false information that was later proven false. They never bother going back and fixing such errors and omissions, either. They are a gossip rag that prints things based on speculation and very biased opinions. Never trust The Register.

2. WGA does the same thing as WPA, in that is is a check on the hardware that creates a unique hash, that is subsequently either OK-ed or denied when the system requests software, updates, or Microsoft resources. This is no different that the WPA uproar, and it turns out that was no real problem to anyone but pirates in the end.

This, as with most of the "checks" MS puts in, only serves to annoy the legit users, The "Pirates" have long since found a work around ...And will continue to use the software however they see fit.
So far, WGA has been completely invisible to the users on my network and at my home. However, the users on my work network and my home systems now have access to software and updates that pirates do not. Defender, for example, won't even install on a system that hasn't had WGA validate.

[Crosshairs]

So far, WGA has been completely invisible to the users on my network and at my home. However, the users on my work network and my home systems now have access to software and updates that pirates do not. Defender, for example, won't even install on a system that hasn't had WGA validate.

Thats nice.....Im glad your enjoying it.

[bob]

I dont care what microsoft stuffs on their OS. I know this is very unpopular, but I usually buy most of the software I use. I really dont care if they check to be sure its legitamate or not.

and where is this EULA legally binding?
and even if it is WGA was released in July 2005, XP (and thus the EULA) was released?

there is nothing in the EULA that says that MS can install spyware

Hmm... What would Judge Judy say (or a real judge)... Verbal contracts seem to hold up in court, I dont see why a "click here if you agree to these terms" contract on a computer wouldnt.

Really makes me think about the maturity of some people. Microsoft was sued a few years back in Europe for bundling windows media player with XP. So what? Its not like you cant go to controll panel, add/remove programs and get rid of it. Or simply choose to not use it. It looks like its more of an issue of people picking fights with the big 'bullies'.

Screw it. Whatever. This is a dead-thread in the making.

[Servant of Shodan]

Please don’t dead-thread it yet. This thread is just marvelous! Even the people I seem to totally disagree with are posting very interesting, and from their point of view, valid, arguments. ;)

...BTW, GreNME, YGPM.

[Faethon]

I don't understand how people complain about WGA and call it a spyware.MS is clear about it since the first authentication tool came out and the user agrees with the terms.

The MGA tools consist of two main components:

* Validation, which determines whether you are running a valid licensed copy of Microsoft Software.
* Notifications, which display periodic reminders such as whether there is a problem with your Windows XP license or whether a more recent service pack is available for your Windows XP software.

"How is this data used?

We use the information to

* Help prevent improperly licensed use of the software
* Improve our software and services
* Develop aggregate statistics.

We may also share aggregate data with others, such as hardware and software vendors and volume licensees to help protect their license keys."
http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/downloads/PrivacyInfo.aspx?displaylang=en

So what do those gentlemen with the law suits cry about?Can't they read?Does MS hide anything?No.

Whoever has done nothing wrong,has nothing to fear.I not only support that,but also hope that this will be spreaded to other professions where theft of fruits of the human intellect occur and will pursue that way within my powers.For example,why do people go to the pharmacy and buy drugs without medical prescription while the drug is clearly marked that should be given only by medical prescription?I don't know in USA,but in Europe people often "recycle" a past medical diagnosis and go to the pharmacy guessing they have the same illness as before and ask for the same drugs without a new prescription.This is violation of the law for which both people AND pharmacists are responsible ,which causes HUGE loss of income to any private doctor.Both patients AND pharmacists should be FINED for every violation of the law and the revenue distributed among private doctors and control mechanisms should be enabled to ensure that the doctors won't lose any more money.Doctors should simply discuss this in local medical associations.No more pharmacy pirates!No more thieves!Microsoft is only trying to protect its legal interests as we should ALL other professionists do!Whoever doesn't like it,go to Linux or back to DOS and stop complaining!

The same should apply to books and especially scientific ones.One copy per household,no photopying by students,no renting.With the widespreading of electronic paper,hopefully a control mechanism can be adopted to make sure the thieves don't have an easy life.People are simply ABUSING of other's intellect today ,just because a paper book is harder to control.Well,count your days!Electronic paper with DRM is on its way to finally protect the interests of the authors.

It's not just MS,we are others too that suffer from the intellectual thieves.Microsoft simply showed us the way and FORTUNATELY is strong enough to make people realise that theft of intellectual work can't be forgiven forever.

I advice all of you "rebels" to get accustomed to the idea,for your own good.The time of arbitrary use of other people's sweat in many life sectors is closing to an end.

[Servant of Shodan]

Faethon,
There are indeed many, as you call them, “rebels”, who brag about stealing MS products and decry any attempt to thwart them. They are indeed parasitic scum, irrelevant to a rational discussion – there will always be thieves, and they will always find a way to steal.

More importantly though, I can fully see your and many others’ position, and why you don’t have a problem handing over all rights to Microsoft for what they consider their property, and any other company that takes a similar stance. I understand it, but I disagree with it.
Can you understand the position of somebody like myself though, who does not want to surrender what I consider my rights of fair use? Nor do I want to have myself or property subjected to period “verifications” at any time. It is not paranoia. It is simply not wanting to have any entity looking over my shoulder whenever they choose. Nor can I put my faith in a company/government/other entity to behave with perfect benevolence, and trust them not to abuse their power.
A legally valid response would be something like: “They have a right to protect their interests, and it is lawful for them to do so.” Well, it is lawful for them to do so because so many companies got together to push the DMCA and so many other copyright laws. Simply because something is “lawful” does not mean it is right or just, especially when a particular law is essentially enacted by people who are doing it to make more money for themselves to the detriment of others.
The next regular response of course is: “Well, you don’t have to use Windows.” Since 1994, I have purchased 6 various retail versions of MS Windows. I have never had the same version installed on more than one computer. I’m not a software pirate or thief, I like Windows just fine, I WANT to use it. I simply do not believe that allowing others to check up on me is a reasonable exchange for using a decent OS, which, regardless of the “licensing” terminology now used, I still consider to me mine.
Now, even if you do not agree with me (as I do not agree with you), do you understand the position and the rationale behind it?

[Newsboys2004]

So basically if you don't like selling over your rights your a pirate?

Where were you guys when we were fighting the British 200 years ago so we could call you guys BENEDICT ARNOLD?

[Faethon]

Yes,i understand your reasoning and if i could chose,i would prefer not to have these checks either.But as long as the law allows MS to do that,i can't do anything about it.I also use Linux and if i see that the legal controls of MS go beyond my limits of tollerance,i will probably try to migrate completely to Linux.So i DO understand the limit of tollerance that may vary from an indiivudal to another.

I just understand MS and hope that other sectors will also soon have the right to pursue methods of protecting their own interests.This will also probably lead to more appropriate legislation of what one can and what cannot put in an EULA,because right now,it's a bit of a jungle if you ask me.Country laws must be updated and regulate better the protection of non material "products" in a way that both the rights are recognised and people aren't constrained to get too intrusive controls.My support for MS,is because it is leading in that effort right now,if any other category of professionists was to attempt anything similar,it would fail.The software market on the other hand,introduces new concepts in intellectual property,which can be useful to other categories of professionists too.Doctors in specialization for example,take a famine salary from the state ,because of "lack of money" and get literally exploited while working in hospitals.One studies 6 years (in the best of case,if he doesn't miss a single exam) plus at least 4 of specialization,during which ,he takes a basic salary working in state hospitals,in rough hours,while the money are there,but the state close its eyes to the "pharmacy pirates".So,software companies want to use controls,DRM etc to protect their legitimate interests?Fine,they may give a chance to the rest of us to pursue OUR legitimate interests too.

The tendency is to make you pay even the air you breathe in Tv,radio,dvds,with watermarks etc.Now,i think that sooner or later,things will FORCE the other professionist categories that are in the same fate dealing with fruits of human intellect,to demand their own rights too.I mean,if a specializing doctor gets about 1000 Euros a month,and he can't record a tv program but must pay for the commercial dvd,an operating system costs almost as much as a PC,an antivirus costs about 60 Euros,a DVD about 25 Euros,etc,i am confident,that the category will be fed up and seek our rights just like MS or Sony or any other does.And their methods used will be a sort of juridical precedent for all the others.At the end,what i say ,is that the market will be ri-equilibrated and that will be good for the rest of us.MS controls too much?I don't know,i think national legislation must do more ,make clear regulations that will serve both software companies and the other sectors interested in the argument.If it doesn't happen,then,we will see ugly days indeed,because each one will try to impose his rights in the best way possible,because as you understand,the situation can't see only software companies that secure their revenues while others that also live from intellectual type of working ,keep being robbed and at the same time pay the prices of MS,Sony,etc.

This is my reasoning.

[OldPueblo]

So basically if you don't like selling over your rights your a pirate?

Where were you guys when we were fighting the British 200 years ago so we could call you guys BENEDICT ARNOLD?

I don't remember seeing a "Newsboys2004 Official Rights" in the EULA. I do however see plenty of info on MS rights in there. :) That thing that you basically have agreed to by using windows.

These lawsuits vs WGA are nothing different then the hot coffee spilled in the lap at McDonalds law suit or any other frivolous suit where those filing aren't actually victims. They are attempting to exploit a pathetic argument and make some money. And obviously there are enough tin foil hat loop-hole searching fanatics to support them. What'll be next? Suing for the fact that the Windows Update site scans your computer and can see exactly what security patches you DON'T have thereby telling MS how they can hack your system to drain your bank account in order to continue financing their campaign of sinister ebil? That argumen is just about as valid. Hell why not, anything goes because I have a lawyer!

[Gatticus]

So basically if you don't like selling over your rights your a pirate?

Where were you guys when we were fighting the British 200 years ago so we could call you guys BENEDICT ARNOLD?

They would have been the turncoats. ;)

[Gatticus]

Dude, you are just whacked out, and need some help. Taking a closer look at your sig though explains a lot:

Yea, that sig is pretty twisted.

[xX_Jack_Carver_Xx]

Whoever has done nothing wrong,has nothing to fear.

Funny, that is just what the Gestapo used to say.

Where were you guys when we were fighting the British 200 years ago so we could call you guys BENEDICT ARNOLD?

Nah, they were called Loyalists.

Not that any of this is that serious, but always keep in mind, realistically computer users in this day and age, who use a computer to make use of mainstream applications, games, etc, are NOT free to make any other choice.

WindowsXP is the only viable option, it is such due to 20+ yrs of monopolistic practices on the part of Microsoft. Microsoft has succeeded in becoming the pre-eminent owner of the OS marketplace, and as such takes on the responsibilities that comes with ultimate power.

As any human endeavor, Microsoft cannot help but abuse its position, justifying and rationalizing anything it deems necessary under the guise of whatever theory they wish.

Sure, in the interest of "security" they have to put programs on your computer to "HELP YOU" achive complaince with thier wishes. To "HELP YOU" achieve complaince with thier business partners wishes (ie: ratting you out for real or imaginary wrong licencing on random other non-microsoft applications).

Microsoft is just damn lucky that the republicans altered the antitrust laws in 1983, otherwise it'd be REAL ANTITRUST violations landing on thier head.

Not sure if you realize, the antitrust laws were altered to state that only if the PRICE to the consumer was affected adversely, would the violation require legal action. Since Microsoft didn't use this situation to put a hardcore price squeeze on their customer, its NOT monopolistic practices.... heh, tell THAT to the businesses they've run over like a bus in the last 20+ years.

As written by Teddy Roosevelt and intact until 1983, Microsoft would have been broken up as a monopoly long ago. The same change in the law has allowed the good old Standard Oil Corp to re-assemble itself, just 3 mergers left to complete the job.

I have no doubt the lawsuits WILL get some progress in fighting WGA, it is one thing to have a viable manner of assuring an install is validly licensed, it is quite another to setup shop as a spy operation reporting (and we only have Microsoft's word on this) back information of an unknown extent to unknown parties.

homeland security may rightly be concerned that any HOLES in the program could end up used by thieves or terrorists to evil ends. Of course, we all know Microsoft would NEVER have a security hole in any program they've written. Cough.

[pigster]

Microsoft is just damn lucky that the republicans altered the antitrust laws in 1983, otherwise it'd be REAL ANTITRUST violations landing on thier head.

Not sure if you realize, the antitrust laws were altered to state that only if the PRICE to the consumer was affected adversely, would the violation require legal action.

Actually, the Reagan administration of the 1980's was the ones who broke up ATT into 6 baby bells because they were a monopoly and non-competitive. I'm not aware of any changes to antitrust laws in 1983, perhaps you could provide some details?

[br0adband]

Being a monopoly is not in and of itself illegal, something most people just don't understand. But being a monopoly because of anti-competitive practices used to maintain or acquire the monopoly in the first place is and that's where the trouble comes in.

I for one could care less about WGA or anything else Microsoft does. I use the OS because it's what I use. I have Xubuntu installed as a dual boot and for learning purposes, etc. It's just not relevant to me that all this crap stirs up so much shit in the long run.

Use, don't use it, it's a pretty simple choice. I still say the argument "But I can't run my games unless I run Windows" is pretty sad.

bb

[swatbat]

I always keep reading that WGA can flag a legit copy. Has anyone seen this yet? The only thing I've seen so far is where someone loaded a pirate copy of a volume key on a machine that had a legit key on it. The thing is if you have a legit copy it is a phone call to ms to get it straight. While we all know people who have some borrowed software can you really fault MS for trying to protect there property? As far as the people who say this will not hurt the pirates sure it will. Someone already said how he builds machines for people at work and another guy undercuts him by dropping a pirate copy of windows on. Everytime he has to rework a machine to fix it from saying "I'm not legit" he is hurting himself. Hell what happens when a few people he made machines for call ms for support and drop his name? Take this to the next scale when a repair shop that builds machines does this. MS will catch extra pirates through this.

Also to OldPueblo for the price of windows. Good job although windows cost a little more for an OEM when it came out. Still I think people will get the idea. People that thing windows is expensive look at mac os. With version 10 you have 5 versions over what 5 or 6 years with 4 of them costing 130 bucks and the 5th(10.1) being like 30. Still think windows is expensive? Sure I would love the OS to be cheaper but I don't think it unreal. For refrence I have legit copys of xp pro(multiple), mac os, 2000 server, 2003 server, boxed copies of freebsd, redhat enterprise, as well as free copies of lunix/bsd on systems.

[GreNME]

I always keep reading that WGA can flag a legit copy. Has anyone seen this yet? The only thing I've seen so far is where someone loaded a pirate copy of a volume key on a machine that had a legit key on it. The thing is if you have a legit copy it is a phone call to ms to get it straight. While we all know people who have some borrowed software can you really fault MS for trying to protect there property? As far as the people who say this will not hurt the pirates sure it will. Someone already said how he builds machines for people at work and another guy undercuts him by dropping a pirate copy of windows on. Everytime he has to rework a machine to fix it from saying "I'm not legit" he is hurting himself. Hell what happens when a few people he made machines for call ms for support and drop his name? Take this to the next scale when a repair shop that builds machines does this. MS will catch extra pirates through this.
And, in the long run, that is one of the things Microsoft really wants to aim for. Trying to chase down individuals like the ridiculous RIAA is not what MS is looking to do. Instead, what they want to find are the larger operations, whether it be system builders who are woefully out of compliance or some stores selling OEMs under incorrect terms for the OEM license (this means NewEgg and others may alter policy).

Also to OldPueblo for the price of windows. Good job although windows cost a little more for an OEM when it came out. Still I think people will get the idea. People that thing windows is expensive look at mac os. With version 10 you have 5 versions over what 5 or 6 years with 4 of them costing 130 bucks and the 5th(10.1) being like 30. Still think windows is expensive? Sure I would love the OS to be cheaper but I don't think it unreal. For refrence I have legit copys of xp pro(multiple), mac os, 2000 server, 2003 server, boxed copies of freebsd, redhat enterprise, as well as free copies of lunix/bsd on systems.
On top of that, let's look at the general cost of MS software from a long-term comparison. The Windows OS was roughly the same dollar amount in price ten and fifteen years ago. Even just ten years ago, that same dollar amount actually equated to a higher cost to the consumer, because the dollar could buy more back then. So, in effect, the cost has come down slightly over the years. This isn't significant, but compared to what we spent on software (and hardware) ten, fifteen and twenty years ago the costs for Windows isn't so bad. Adobe products, on the other hand, are often a blatant rip-off. Apple is and has always been a premium, but they have also gone down in price slightly like Microsoft.

[swatbat]

And, in the long run, that is one of the things Microsoft really wants to aim for. Trying to chase down individuals like the ridiculous RIAA is not what MS is looking to do. Instead, what they want to find are the larger operations, whether it be system builders who are woefully out of compliance or some stores selling OEMs under incorrect terms for the OEM license (this means NewEgg and others may alter policy).


I didn't want to mean they would be going after individuals per say. I was thinking more of the repair shops that build machines but hell if the guy that someone elce brought up is building machines kinda often yea I'm sure they wouldn't mind going after him. Depends on how many machines he is dropping the software on.

Also I know apple carys a price premium but people always try to bash ms for pricing and it is always interesting to look at others pricing. Then again RedHat WS is like 180 with the basic support.

[Servant of Shodan]

I always keep reading that WGA can flag a legit copy. Has anyone seen this yet?
I have not seen this with WGA, but I can attest that the copy of WinXP Home that came with my wife's Compaq laptop has forced me to call MS Activation when I reformatted her HD and reinstalled. I have seen dozens of times when reinstalling my own WinXP, the "This has been activated before please contact MS." type of message. But the message that popped up on my wife's computer was like, "MS cannot verify that this is an authentic Microsoft product..." I would really suppose that if activation can and does hit snags, WGA will too.

[swatbat]

I have not seen this with WGA, but I can attest that the copy of WinXP Home that came with my wife's Compaq laptop has forced me to call MS Activation when I reformatted her HD and reinstalled. I have seen dozens of times when reinstalling my own WinXP, the "This has been activated before please contact MS." type of message. But the message that popped up on my wife's computer was like, "MS cannot verify that this is an authentic Microsoft product..." I would really suppose that if activation can and does hit snags, WGA will too.

For the most part those are when you first install though. I'm just wondering in reality how often WGA is flagging a legit copy? I'm sure it happens but I would think it is just a quick call to ms to fix.

[GreNME]

I didn't want to mean they would be going after individuals per say. I was thinking more of the repair shops that build machines but hell if the guy that someone elce brought up is building machines kinda often yea I'm sure they wouldn't mind going after him. Depends on how many machines he is dropping the software on.

Also I know apple carys a price premium but people always try to bash ms for pricing and it is always interesting to look at others pricing. Then again RedHat WS is like 180 with the basic support.
No, I was actually agreeing with you, not contradicting you.

[Faethon]

I always keep reading that WGA can flag a legit copy. Has anyone seen this yet?

Well,if we want to be honest,MS has admitted a 20% false positive :

MS: 20% of WGA failures not caused by pirated keys
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=89

That's why i think goverments should be more interested and adopt legislation to make the life of both parts easier.

[swatbat]

Well,if we want to be honest,MS has admitted a 20% false positive :

MS: 20% of WGA failures not caused by pirated keys
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=89

That's why i think goverments should be more interested and adopt legislation to make the life of both parts easier.

At first I was like holly shit but the article is being misleading. It says

Through its spokeswoman, Microsoft said that “80% of all WGA validation failures are due to unauthorized use of leaked or stolen volume license keys.”

So 80% are from volume license keys that don't require activation. The remaining 20 percent does not mean legit users. They can be users that have used an activation crack, normal keys that have been flagged because people have loaded them on multiple machines, trial keys that have been been hacked to remove the time bomb etc.

Quoteing MS from the article

While we will don't have specifics to share on other forms counterfeit installations, they mostly result from activities such as various forms of tampering and unauthorized OEM installations.

Figure most of them are like this.

[lodingi]

They do own the OS, you are just licensing it from them. Like leasing a car. :D

but unlike windows, you do have the option to purchase the vehicle. ;)