Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops

hackread.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 131 posts

Re: Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops

#121

Post by mosselman »

pizza234 wrote: post #77
mosselman wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like ebay's problem. Why are they not shut down for this? If I came across some software on e-bay, I'd assume it was legit. I just checked ebay and it is full of windows keys. How am I, as a consumer, supposed to know that this is 'illegal'?

The same way you're supposed to know if a bike is stolen. If the given market is grey/shady and the price is excessively low, and you really want to know, you ask (for starters).

Software isn’t a bike. It might be a special deal Microsoft has with those vendors. Bikes have an intrinsic minimal cost, like materials and shipping, software keys don’t. The average consumer would probably regard windows as something that is free to begin with so seeing it for sale for $10 probably won’t strike them as strange, you get it “free” with your computer after all.

Furthermore, this is not one vendor selling one ‘stolen’ item, it is many, selling many keys. This makes it seems like a legitimate channel for keys to the average consumer. It also makes eBay more responsible if you ask me. It seems to me as if they are making a profit from those sales. If they truly are illegal keys then they should probably do something about it.

So why am I wrong here?

Re: Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops

#122

Post by rasz »

Ziomislaw wrote: post #91
dx034 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't the ban on resale of licenses declared illegal at least in some countries? In that case, second hand licenses would very well be legal, even if Microsoft doesn't like them.

it is illegal in Poland

It is 100% legal in Poland and rest of EU. Oracle vs Usedsoft http://www.osborneclarke.com/insights/the-end-of-the-usedsof...

Re: Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops

#123

Post by ekianjo »

bildung wrote: post #114
ekianjo wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, you can't have successful train operations in low density areas. Hokkaido, Shikoku, and the extreme west of japan is doomed in that regard. I don't even know how you could expect things to turn differently. But in Tokyo, and Kansai, the private train companies are doing very well.

But that's the point - the profitable tracks were probably profitable before privatization, too (no idea about Japan, but it was the case in Germany). Service in low density areas is the crux of the matter: railroad is a necessary infrastructure there, and if a nation wants to keep quality of life high in these areas, the tracks have to be operated at a loss. It's the same with postal services, broadband access and s…

Your comparison is probably not accurate. The situation now is completely different from 30 years ago. Cars have become much cheaper at the same time, there are low cost options for travelling larger distance like planes and buses, that did not exist as much before. This is not a single variable environment here.

Re: Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops

#124

Post by ekianjo »

chmod775 wrote: post #120
bildung wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the point - the profitable tracks were probably profitable before privatization, too (no idea about Japan, but it was the case in Germany). Service in low density areas is the crux of the matter: railroad is a necessary infrastructure there, and if a nation wants to keep quality of life high in these areas, the tracks have to be operated at a loss. It's the same with postal services, broadband access and s…

So much this . On top of that, railroads (the actual rails and public transport lines) also tend to be a somewhat natural monopoly, so even the high profit lines veer towards minimal service and maximal price.

Completely wrong about the monopoly part. In the US most of the road tracks were created and driven by private companies. And they were competing on destinations and cost.

In Japan right now there are multiple lines that you could take to reach the same destination so there is actually a lot of competition going on.

Re: Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops

#125

Post by shakna »

lmcarreiro wrote: post #68
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article mentions another $7M worth of fines, and that's just for the US. Also, they sold their customers pretty cheap, so the combined fines likely significantly exceed the profit from the deal: https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2015/02/27/lenov... While I do think the punishment should be significantly more severe (including jail time for executives), I suspect the scandal has made companies aware that…

Big companies usually already have their enterprise customized image of the OS, when they buy hardware, they are interested only in the hardware.

And the Windows Platform Binary Table let Lenovo put it back on the drive via UEFI at boot. [0]

[0] https://news.lenovo.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=2013

Re: Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops

#126

Post by shakna »

Ziomislaw wrote: post #90
murph-almighty wrote: post #88

Suppose I purchase a laptop from Lenovo. Do I have a surefire way to easily decrapify the laptop?

dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda

To expand:

Lenovo's LSE used UEFI to redeploy the binaries thanks to Microsoft's wonderful Windows Platform Binary Table.

Microsoft's default Disk Management system cannot remove EFI partitions (in all cases), and you need to.

Re: Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops

#127

Post by lamlam »

jammygit wrote: post #116
lamlam wrote: post #12

I'm always surprised that Lenovo use in the enterprise space didn't take a hit after all this came to light. I would have thought competitors like Dell and HPE would have used that opportunity to disparage Lenovo.

Dell did it too. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/11/dell-... Apparently hp also https://www.computerworld.com/article/3238512/microsoft-wind...

Very interesting! I had not heard of these incidences.

Re: Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops

#128

Post by chmod775 »

ekianjo wrote: post #124
chmod775 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much this . On top of that, railroads (the actual rails and public transport lines) also tend to be a somewhat natural monopoly, so even the high profit lines veer towards minimal service and maximal price.

Completely wrong about the monopoly part. In the US most of the road tracks were created and driven by private companies. And they were competing on destinations and cost. In Japan right now there are multiple lines that you could take to reach the same destination so there is actually a lot of competition going on.

There's a limit on the amount of subway lines you can squeeze under a city. Nobody is going to run a parallel lines.

The most a government can do is figure out beforehand which private company would build and run those cheapest for a certain line, but then you end up with the cheapest solution again, which is not the solution you actually want for infrastructure your economy depends upon.

Also, as the parent pointed out, Japan is a good example for why private companies by themselves aren't enough to run infrastructure like that, since you still need it even if they are unprofitable. And so they need government subsidies. You end up with a company paid for by the tax payer - as if it was nationalized - but with much less control by the government. Basically a money sink that isn't accountable to the tax payer. We have that in Berlin after the public transport was privatized. Can't recommend.

Re: Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops

#129

Post by ekianjo »

chmod775 wrote: post #128
ekianjo wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely wrong about the monopoly part. In the US most of the road tracks were created and driven by private companies. And they were competing on destinations and cost. In Japan right now there are multiple lines that you could take to reach the same destination so there is actually a lot of competition going on.

There's a limit on the amount of subway lines you can squeeze under a city. Nobody is going to run a parallel lines. The most a government can do is figure out beforehand which private company would build and run those cheapest for a certain line, but then you end up with the cheapest solution again, which is not the solution you actually want for infrastructure your economy depends upon. Also, as the parent pointed…

> There's a limit on the amount of subway lines you can squeeze under a city. Nobody is going to run a parallel lines.

Tokyo is a good counter example: you have metro lines and multiple ground lines, and buses, all competing against each other.

> Japan is a good example for why private companies by themselves aren't enough to run infrastructure like that,

What is your point? Japan is exactly the right example here, you have country-wide private companies operating and running an excellent service (world class) at reasonable cost.

Re: Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops

#130

Post by chmod775 »

ekianjo wrote: post #129
chmod775 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a limit on the amount of subway lines you can squeeze under a city. Nobody is going to run a parallel lines. The most a government can do is figure out beforehand which private company would build and run those cheapest for a certain line, but then you end up with the cheapest solution again, which is not the solution you actually want for infrastructure your economy depends upon. Also, as the parent pointed…

> There's a limit on the amount of subway lines you can squeeze under a city. Nobody is going to run a parallel lines. Tokyo is a good counter example: you have metro lines and multiple ground lines, and buses, all competing against each other. > Japan is a good example for why private companies by themselves aren't enough to run infrastructure like that, What is your point? Japan is exactly the right example here, y…

> What is your point? Japan...

Only a bunch of them are profitable and some are even incurring record losses this year and relying on government money to keep operating.

Can't let them go bankrupt because they're still important. Honestly I explained this in my earlier post, good job cropping that.

Post reply on HN