Crack down on counterfeit software. 1

[linney]

Microsoft is aiming to crack down on counterfeit software, Microsoft plans later this year to require customers to verify that their copy of Windows is genuine before downloading security patches and other add-ons to the operating system.Since last fall the company has been testing a tool that can check whether a particular version of Windows is legitimate, but until now the checks have been voluntary. Starting Feb. 7, the verification will be mandatory for many downloads for people in three countries: China, Norway and the Czech Republic."

View: Full Story

http://news.com.com/Microsoft+Legit+Windows+or+no+updates/2100-1016_3-5550205.html?tag=nefd.top

 

[bcastner]

Question: you are a publicly traded company. Industry analysts estimate that 92% of one of your products is an illegal copy in China, and over 60% in many other countries.

Your are CEO.
Do you do nothing?

 

[ockerb]

methinks it is the same old argument that crops up all the time when these actions are taken by software producers. Will they get a greater revenue return on their product if they reduced the price of the product. I personally believe many thousands more people will purchase a legitamate OS product if it was within their budget. Whether MS do better with more legitamate sales at a reduced cost is anyones guess, my guess, in western countries...yes. In asian and african countries...probably not. I think the same argument can be had about all types of software, appz, games, songs or movies. I also suggest that the harder they try to protect their software fro piracy the harder the crackers try to crack it...after all it is only a challenge...isn't it? That's my thoughts anyway so don't reply and rip my face of it's just an opinion

Ockerb

 

[dbMark]

Jumping too fast to force testing the OS can be a public relations nightmare, which is why M$ is approaching this issue one step at a time, trying to get people used to the idea in small steps. While all agree the counterfeiters who are *profiteering* on mass-produced stolen property deserve to get the book thrown at them, I ask, then why do I, with my legit XP disk and all, dread replacing the hard drive or reinstalling Windows, which has already happened once? A bit of fear factor. Something's wrong when the legit users have more worry than the counterfeiters. To have a too-tight grip on licensing reminds me more of Novell's approach to licensing.

In the Office competition, Sun's StarOffice sounds better every day. StarOffice is much cheaper than M$ Office and you get 5 licenses with it, enough for the office, your laptop, home and have a couple spares left over. And that's not even talking about free OpenOffice.

In the old days I upgraded because each new version was desperately needed, from DOS to Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows 98, etc. But Microsoft is finding that as each newer version gets better and better, many don't "have" to upgrade immediately and they do so only when they finally replace the computer. Probably Microsoft's long term goal is: rent it annually.

 

[linney]

Windows is a first rate product which has unfortunately outgrown the competition, leaving it as a monopoly with little or real competition. We the users are our own worst enemies, totally addicted, except for the few brave souls enjoying Linux etc.

I don't see the day in the near future where it will be different with some real competition. Sad to say the only competition seems to be from the illegal hackers, who Microsoft are attempting to coral with the carrot and stick approach.

Weaning people off Windows is a whole new subject in itself. Perhaps to be solved by a new generation of computers which are (excuse my humor) Vegetarians rather than lumps of wire and metal.

 

[aftertaf]

i agree with the pricing of the thing...
it's like p2p music 'pirates'
(i'll wear my eye patch for this one...)
when you see the price of a new CD being at 25€ or more, i'm sorry, but i'm gonna download instead.

everything is becoming sooooo expensive, and we're not being paid more... and what's more, if you don't consume like you're programmed to do (anyone object to this part, show me one place you aren't choked to death on advertising.) then you're not a good citizen, you dont BELONG in this society where you must have the latest of everything in order to fit in.

5 years ago, i remember laughing at a friend because he got himself a mobile phone - cost him and arm and a leg to begin with, then for us to call him it was very expensive. but he's addicted to gadgets of all kinds... then the trend set in, and now if you don't have one, you're considered abnormal by most.

if they were to reduce the price to something reasonable (this'll open up a new debate: what is YOUR definition of reasonable), i'd buy more CDs, and my version of XP too.
but they won't, and the whole thing's upside down.

the few brave souls enjoying Linux etc

more and more each year... i might be on my way to MCSE'dom, but i want to learn open source as much as possible, because the price of licensing is becoming so restrictive for all but big money making machines, that i want to be able to offer to my employer an alternative way of doing things (that doesn't necessarily drop down dead when the next code red-esque nasty hits the M$ machines )

that way i might be able to earn more (saved them money on their IT budget), and buy some CDs instead of risking prison by d/ling some mp3.
Anyone here ever do time for copying an album to a 90 minute tape?
didn't think so.


Aftertaf
if its not broken, fix it anyway - with luck you might break it and have an excuse

 

[Nelviticus]

Apologies for having a bit of a rant but if you can't afford essentials such as food or clean water then you can be excused for stealing them. If you can't afford luxuries like CDs or operating systems then you should just live without them. Claiming that a CD or software is so expensive that you "have" to pirate it just doesn't wash.

I'm surprised the story is given so much attention. I'm even more surprised that Microsoft allowed unverified users to download patches in the first place.

And I don't even like Microsoft!

Nelviticus

 

[aftertaf]

i dont have to...
i choose to
on principle.

Aftertaf
if its not broken, fix it anyway - with luck you might break it and have an excuse

 

[aftertaf]

then again, i do agree on their principle too....
but if they dropped their prices a bit, i do think it would make a difference.

and those who bought their full version, its fair to them if a 'pirate' gets a discount to upgrade his license to an authentic one?
my opinion is 'no'...
but it remains MY opinion, and i'm not forcing it on anyone or criticising for not sharing my opinion.
neliticus: for info... how much do CDs cost where you are?

Aftertaf
if its not broken, fix it anyway - with luck you might break it and have an excuse

 

[dbMark]

and those who bought their full version, its fair to them if a 'pirate' gets a discount to upgrade his license to an authentic one?

I agree, it's not fair to the person who paid a high price price for a legitimate copy of a product to have to then watch others who didn't follow the rules get it cheaper. Reminds me of the kids in high school who skirted the rules, they knew just how far they could go. Me, I make one dinky little mistake and get pinned to the wall. Yep, life's not fair.

I have an uncle who's always said it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.

 

[bcastner]

Microsoft XP is one of the best consumer products I have every purchased. (Do not even ask my feelings about television sets, cars, or my daughter's pussycats.)

The next closest in satisfaction was Win2k Pro.

 

[aquias]

Well this debate will go on for a very long time. I'm on the fence about this one, and before anyone beats me down I'll tell you why.

First things first, pirating vs stealing, there's no debate. If you download, you're stealing and as such if MS can cut off your ability to use its product kudos to them. They're protecting their own interests, like any good company should.

Now, how can I feel that way and still be on the fence about this? Is it a cost issue? Yes and no. Then what could it be you ask? Linney hit the nail on the head, lack of viable options mixed with the prohibitive cost of MS products.

Due to the leap in funds and years of production that Windows has over any competition it is hard to see a GUI based alternative rising anytime in the near future. Due to that fact, MS can charge pretty close to what they want and if, a non-technical user, wants a system, what choice is there? Quite a few people would boot up Linux, stare at the screen and shut down their system to never power it up again.

This brings about the good ol' arguement, computers aren't essential. Well now...lets look at this shall we? Currently, most Middle schoolers and up are forced to do some kind of computer work (or hand in papers that are printed up), via research or some other method they really do need a computer.

I hear it now, but Aquias, what about the Libraries? Well, I'll use my city as an example, due to poor city planning, worse budget planning, and a shrinking job market there is a strong chance of a "Red budget" going into affect. As part of this budget all libraries in the area would spend more than half the year closed down.

What then, is a student to do if they don't have a computer and a lot of funds at home to afford one? Hope that mommy and daddy are Linux savy? Or hope that they know someone, who knows someone, who's got a pirated copy of Windows?

MS has a great product, I agree with Bill on that, but without a cost effective and EASY to use alternative, people are going to pirate. Whether they have reason or not.

So, in brief recap. Pirate bad, MS good, but bad, and there needs to be a change in the OS market and fast..

 

[bcastner]

If I pirated an application written by aftertaf, he would have quite rightly lawyers at my front door.

It is theft pure and simple. Many years ago I had a chance conversation with Mitch Kapor, (he was in the airline seat next to me), and his company (now owned by IBM) had introduced a security lock on its newest version of Lotus 1-2-3 (a brilliant product in my view).

I introduced myself and asked him about this. I told him it took me roughly 35 minutes to "undo" the security feature, and on the internet (we are talking a loooong time ago) if I had searched it would have saved me 32 minutes.

He made several points in the conversation, that I still remember:

. Security features were a mistake. They create an annoyance for a legal user, and all of them can be beat by some hacker like you. So it is a stupid decision by the software author, it creates an unacceptable annoyance to a legal user of our software. I understand this now, and have offered to all or licensees the ability to get a copy of 1-2-3 with this removed.

. His second set of thoughts still resonate with me. (this is a paraphrase): "Why would you have a serious problem walking into a local grocery store and stuffing a six-pack of Coca-Cola down your pants and walking out, but do not hesitate to download a $395 dollar piece of software? What is it as an ethical question that would bar one from doing the first action, and not hesitate to do the latter? There is an ethical lapse in our notion of software and the entitlement of its authors. Perhaps because it is so widely done, and perhaps because the internet makes it so easy. But the notion of stealing property because you can would have horrified my parents. I am concerned that the ethical values of an entire generation of young folks are being compromised with the ease and speed of file sharing software and the internet."

(end paraphrase).

 

[Nelviticus]

If a student doesn't have a computer or the funds to buy one then they aren't going to pirate Windows as they'll have nowhere to install it.

I have no idea what the statistics are for the typical Windows pirate but I suspect that in the UK/US they're mostly people who either build their own PC or build them for others on a small scale. Those who buy ready-made machines from legitimate retailers will probably have an OS pre-installed.

Viewed as a system component XP Home is cheaper than a reasonable graphics card. It's impossible to pirate a graphics card: if it became equally impossible to pirate the operating system I don't think we'd see a noticeable drop in new PC ownership or a shift to Linux.

Oh, and Aftertaf - CDs are ridiculously expensive here in the UK so I don't buy many!

Nelviticus

 

[bcastner]

In some countries in the Pacific Rim, the pirated copies of XP approach 92% of all installations.

This is obviously ridiculous.

Once concern of Microsoft is that the security of its legal installed base is compromised by the illegal installed base.

This is why they have been unofficially "nice" about allowing illegal copies of XP to obtain updates. They have now taken their gloves off. It is their feeling that a legal copy, with the Windows Update service, and other product offerings (the Beta Antispyware is a free download, and you will see an antivirus product as well) can be protected from any issues arising from the lack of security hotfixes in illegal copies of XP.

Note how this is being done: Protect legal licenses first. Then cover your assets.

 

[aquias]

I understand your point and I don't argue with the fact that this is theft, my point of contention here isn't with that. It's with the market in general. We are a society that has almost made having access to a system a must for a family. Those without are at a severe disadvantage and may not be able to adequately complete tasks assigned to them (I point back to school goers).

The market needs to change, we need a viable alternative that is more cost effective to the user than MS. Linux exists but like most have pointed out, that is an advanced user OS.

Now, as to the whole point of not being able to afford a system. I keep an eye on for sales ad, just an odd habit I picked up somewhere. I can find several dirt cheap computer systems in it, many of them come without an OS or without one or two components (my only guess on the OS is someone is keeping their license and formatted the drive prior to sale). The complete systems give people a cheap PC alternative but not a cheap OS alternative. There has to be some kind of give here.

We cannot continue to push people towards the computer age, when a great deal of people cannot afford to keep up. Yes, I am a bit off topic but this is the defense many people use in regards to pirating. No, it doesn't make it right but it does make it something I can relate to and understand (not like taking the six pack of Coke out of the store).

 

[bcastner]

I would love a Porsche 911. But I am not going to steal one.

Bill and Melinda Gates have just become the most prolific philanthropists in history. In adition, the incredibile money, time and attention that have has been given to the public access computer project is worthy of comment.

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Libraries/

Do I use BittTorrent, eMule, Piolet or other P2P applications?

Yes I do, and support them as bcastner, MVM at

http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/swapping

But I never keep a tested application longer than 10 days, and I always talk to the folks at the company if I like the product.

And I would like to steal my neighbor's Porsche, but I suspect he would notice.

 

[aquias]

Again I get your point Bill. This just isn't a black and white issue to me. Well, let me correct that, the pirating is, it is wrong. But in many instances (no not all) it's a matter of what people feel is necessity.

This entire issue is about more than the pirating issue to me. It's about a deeper problem with our current situation and the way the world is heading, that is what tinges my arguements on this and why I continue to come back to post on this subject.

Should all companies look for a way to deal with pirating? Yes, it's just good business sense to do so. Are people who pirate stealing? Yes. But we, as a society, are coming to a point where we assume everyone has a PC at home and internet access. We're coming to a point where those who cannot afford the costs of software/hardware are being left far behind.

In addition to this, facilities that should be in place to help lessen the burden on less fortunate families (IE. Libraries, schools, etc...) are all having their budgets slashed and are unable to provide any access to this kind of equipment.

Is pirating wrong? Yes. If I was in a position where I could get a blank system together but couldn't afford XP and I had a child in school, would I take any copy I could get my hands on? Without hesitation. Say what you will to me, but everyone I talk to with children are constantly online and typing up papers with them, because it has become the requirement for their children.

And, for those of you curious, if I could get my hands on a few more systems and some licensing I'd run a PC shop out of my house for them. As it is two families spend more than a few nights a week at my place on my system because it's the only way their child can keep up.

 

[aquias]

And I apologize, I know I'm a bit off topic but some of the comments here fired me up a bit on this.

 

[MikeCouling]

I'd have thought that for theft to have occurred someone has to have lost something. If I download software that I would never have otherwise bought because it's too expensive for me, nobody has lost anything. In fact although the publisher would never admit it, I guess he would prefer me to be a user because if I'm impressed with his product, I'm likely to tell people about it. Especially in a new market area like China was.
However if I get a pirate copy because I'm a cheapskate and would have paid for it otherwise, then that is theft. Only the "offender" can really tell you.