Everybody is reading this wrong, which isn't a huge surprise because the Post seems to have nobody on hand who understands the facts of the case and relied on an interview with Lundgren heavily. He was not providing people with restore media they could use to fix their own machines. He was taking the restore media, burning it onto discs _with official Microsoft and Dell logos on them_ and then _selling them to computer refurbishers who would then include them with PCs they were selling._ In other words, people were buying PCs with these counterfeit restore discs passed off as actual Dell/Microsoft product. Yes, the media only works with a valid Windows license on the machine already, but reselling the PC like this with the counterfeit restore media likely voids that Windows license agreement. Lundgren is far less innocent than the Washington Post article implies.
E-waste recycler loses appeal on computer restore disks, must serve prison term
171–180 of 273 posts
Re: E-waste recycler loses appeal on computer restore disks, must serve prison term
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, this is an unabashedly sinister misinformation campaign by someone who didn't read the article or understand what this guy was doing. He wasn't distributing restore disks with refurbished PCs. He manufactured 28000 Restore Disks containing Microsoft Windows and was selling them. He justified his actions by saying they were only to be used on licensed machines. That's like me selling a backup copy of your Book and…
No, not at all. It is more akin to you selling a backup copy of the book that is bound by a lock. The people that buy your version of the book must either already have the key to unlock it or buy it separately.
Or do a quick google search for a copy of the key.
The point is, he doesn't have permission to distribute the software.
If I was selling "recovery" Kindle eBooks but only to people who pinkie swore they already purchased the book, do you think Amazon or the Publishers would mind? How is this different?
Re: E-waste recycler loses appeal on computer restore disks, must serve prison term
#173I want to know what harm he has done or what danger he poses to society that warrants a 15 month prison sentence. I feel like this is what pardons are for.
The law is rarely used to protect society. The law is being abused to punish an individual for messing with a corporate agenda.
Re: E-waste recycler loses appeal on computer restore disks, must serve prison term
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're missing the whole crux of the story. The supposed law broken here (none, actually) is based on multiple judges being absolutely clueless about technology and refusing the regard the testimony of an expert witness who was trying to set the first judge straight.
The other thing that makes this story different than most the others you hear about is that there wasn't multiple layers of indirection and middle-management working on vague ideas of what was wanted by their executive management (wink-wink-nudge-nudge). That's one of the sad truths about life. Those that break the law, or do things seen as unsavory, take pains to hide their actions, motivations, and responsibility.…
[deleted]
Re: E-waste recycler loses appeal on computer restore disks, must serve prison term
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most copyright jursidictions make a difference for non-commercial copyrigth infringement and commercial copyright infringement. Most of them put commercial copyright infringement in the criminal offence category.
The law violation is akin to being ticketed for jaywalking across an empty road. The court ignored expert witness testimony that the disks were useless without a valid license and came up with a ludicrous amount. The defendants belief was that many customers weren't knowledgeable enough to download restore images from the internet. He was selling them to used computer shops so they could provide them to their custome…
> The court ignored expert witness testimony
Do we know why? Courts don't throw out testimony for no reason.
In any case, from what I understand the calculation of value principally factors into the fine. The jail time results from the defendant selling disks with others' logos on them.
Re: E-waste recycler loses appeal on computer restore disks, must serve prison term
#176So, the price MS paid to have him jailed was less than the cost they would incur if people used those discs to restore their machines instead of buying new ones.
Microsoft didn't pursue having him jailed. They sought financial compensation. The government prosecutors pursued the jail term to bolster their own resumes as they always do.
Re: E-waste recycler loses appeal on computer restore disks, must serve prison term
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
Law isn’t an incredibly stupid set of rigid rules thst are easily overcome by being grade-school clever.
I’ve noticed that a lot of programmers I’ve met on and offline seem to think that it is, and often those kind of shallow perspectives are the basis of thought in the world of cryptocurrency as well. Is it the result of how computers and programs work, inasmuch as they just do precisely what they’re told? I’ve had to explain to so many friends that unlike the world of computers, laws are interpreted, and adapt. You ca…
I am fully aware laws are currently interpreted, and adapt. What you see above is merely my interpretation.
Actually "void for vagueness" can be interpreted as a requirement for laws to be precisely defined, and this was not concocted by a clever cryptocurrency nerd.
Re: E-waste recycler loses appeal on computer restore disks, must serve prison term
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no law violated here.
Most copyright jursidictions make a difference for non-commercial copyrigth infringement and commercial copyright infringement. Most of them put commercial copyright infringement in the criminal offence category.
These images where provided by Microsoft for Free and are still available on their website. To use them you need to burn them to disks thus by providing them Microsoft is implicitly giving you that right.
Without a licence which he was not providing they are useless.
Re: E-waste recycler loses appeal on computer restore disks, must serve prison term
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of your examples actually use intellectual property of McDonald’s, ram or milk products. It’s like selling your own burgers with less calories and calling them Big Macs and selling them next door from McDonald’s store. You can’t do that according to law
But your example also isn’t what happened. A more accurate Big Mac example would be McDonald’s is giving away Big Macs, so you go and get a free Big Mac, and then give that Big Mac to your friend. At that point McDonald’s cries that you’re giving away counterfeit Big Macs.
An even more accurate Big Mac example would be McDonald’s is giving away Big Macs in locked boxes placed at every street corner, but you need to pay for the keys to the box. So you let people know that the keys that they paid for earlier are still valid and can still be used, and you show them how. McDonald's cries foul because they just expected people to buy new keys.
Re: E-waste recycler loses appeal on computer restore disks, must serve prison term
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
whats next? "Diet coach Daisy, sent to jail as McDonalds loses customers" "CPU designer Claire, sent to jail as its optimized caching algorithm lowers demand for RAM sales" "Louis Pasteur, unearthed from the grave, incarcerated as milk sales fall due to longer shelf-life"
None of your examples actually use intellectual property of McDonald’s, ram or milk products. It’s like selling your own burgers with less calories and calling them Big Macs and selling them next door from McDonald’s store. You can’t do that according to law
This gentleman is going to jail for making copies of something on a website. I thought Google et al won the right to cache copies of websites without a license. I browse to Google and it does this on a massive scale. Except for the labels, that appears to be exactly what he did. Larger issues in play here and I hope this is not the end of the story.
Also, a 15 month prison sentence for this fictitious price per CD? Really?