91–100 of 273 posts
Is there anything we can do? Can he appeal? EFF? This can't be the end. I guess pressuring MS to drop the charges is too late. We can't have good man in jail over this.
I really hope he appeals this.
This is one of the most unabashedly sinister first-world articles I've read in a while. Microsoft's argument hinges on two damages: Either, they didn't get to charge a convenience fee to customers, or they were losing revenue by people unexpectedly extending the life of their computers. Foolish judges and evil lawyers putting a decent person away for 13 months.
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 "you're only allowed to read this if you bought the book legitimately."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did a little bit more research and my original post was factually inaccurate, but the point was correct. An article from 2011 says this: >The original Microsoft (COA) attached to the PC does not allow you to reload Microsoft Windows software when no original recovery media is present. https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/mssmallbiz/2011/10/05/looki... So that's the crucial point. Yes, the software was free to download,…
> >The original Microsoft (COA) attached to the PC does not allow you to reload Microsoft Windows software when no original recovery media is present. Thank you for digging this up. This is an important point, and I think a lot of us, including myself and the hapless recycler, have naively assumed that sticker plus iso equals a legit install in Microsoft's eyes. Nevertheless, it's still a travesty that he was convict…
Conviction seems fine. The fine is debatable but roughly okay. It’s the jail time that makes no sense.
Reading the court documents, the conclusion is that the guy is shady and the journalist and the newspaper are borderline lying. The correct headline is: "E-waste recycler loses appeal on 28,000 counterfeit windows installation disks, must serve prison term" >The sentencing judge determined that the appropriate infringement value was the value of the infringed discs to small registered refurbishers: $25. The court fou…
That said, I don't see what was the operation. How he created the disks, who are the customers, are there receipts, etc?
I was really angry about this, until I read that the disks had Microsoft and Dell logos.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>Say I have a computer without windows, or maybe an older cheaper version of windows. Is it correct that these restore disks arent a utility to get a free new copy of windows That is correct. You still need a licence key to install Windows using those disks. Without the key the disk is worthless. They aren't and never were a way for people to get "free" copies of windows.
Unfortunately this is an area where copyright law is not up to date with regards to installation media for software with built-in DRM regimes. The value of Windows installation media is the cost of the disk it is burned to + the time it takes to burn unless there's an associated license (or a crack bundled that would let you bypass activation, which got laughably easy post-Windows 8 because of the new SLIC activation…
From the article "“These sales of counterfeit operating systems,” Microsoft lawyer Bonnie MacNaughton wrote to the judge, “displaced Microsoft’s potential sales of genuine operating systems.” But Lundgren’s disks had no licenses and were intended for computers that already had licenses." and even worse, "Hurley decided Lundgren’s 28,000 restore disks had a value of $700,000, and that dollar amount qualified Lundgren…
I dont quite understand the basic legal details behind this. Say I buy a computer with windows pre-installed that means the OS license cost is bundled in to the price of the machine. Say I have a computer without windows, or maybe an older cheaper version of windows. Is it correct that these restore disks arent a utility to get a free new copy of windows? Just trying to understand
The illegal act was a copyright violation: he made and distributed copies of copyrighted material without the consent of the copyright owner. I would be inclined to argue that his use was fair use, but based on what I know about copyright law, that argument is probably a stretch, and he didn't raise it in his defense. He plead guilty to the charges.
As to sentencing, the sentencing guidelines make the value of the illegally distributed goods the primary factor in determining the sentence. There is no objectively correct answer to this question, because no one sells license-less restore disks for any price. The three closest comparisons are
(1) The free restore disk image download offered by Microsoft. This is the same intellectual property, but doesn't come with a physical disk.
(2) OEM Windows disks that Microsoft sells for $25. These come with a license (unlike the defendant's disks) but do come with a physical disk.
(3) The original restore disks that come with a new computer. These match perfectly the intellectual property and the physical form, but they only come bundled as a small part of an expensive package, so it's hard to get a fair price from looking at this.
The defendant argued the free download was the better comparison, the prosecution argued the OEM disks were better. The judge sided with the prosecution, and assigned a value of $25/disk, which resulted in a stiff sentence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dont quite understand the basic legal details behind this. Say I buy a computer with windows pre-installed that means the OS license cost is bundled in to the price of the machine. Say I have a computer without windows, or maybe an older cheaper version of windows. Is it correct that these restore disks arent a utility to get a free new copy of windows? Just trying to understand
No. It used to be that you got a “restore disk” with your new computer. I’ve had a few dells that had this, Apple used to as well. Now if anything, there is a rescue partition or a utility that knows how to download an rescue image. Without a valid license key you shouldn’t be able to use the restore disk. A lot of people who got these just threw them away. This guy was trying to help them reset their computer to a g…
Was this counterfeiting? Most certainly not in spirit, nobody was trying to say "here's a free/discounted copy of Windows" - there were no cracks on the media and you still needed a license to get Windows to activate, but the cold hard truth is the license agreement prohibits copying/redistribution of the installation media.
Lesson of the day: copyright law is stuck in the 1800's in many ways, so don't test your luck and ask Congress to fix it if you think it's broken.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are not a utility to get a free new copy of windows. However, that notwithstanding, copyright law grants Microsoft the exclusive right to arbitrarily restrict how these disks are created. It's just like you can offer some content on your website for free to anyone, but sue anyone who redistributes it for copyright infringement.
I don't recall agreeing to a license when downloading restore images? Presumably customers not receiving a restore image can now reclaim $299 from Microsoft as that is judged the value of the disc that was not included with their license purchase. Or indeed send back the install disc for at least a 50% refund. Just think how much money MS would make buying back install discs for $150. /s (yes, that's right, at least…
Right below "more download options" is this text: *Your use of the media creation tools on this site is governed by the Microsoft Terms of Use for this website.
In the linked Microsoft Terms of Use there's this: "Notice Specific to Software Available on this Website" [...] WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, COPYING OR REPRODUCTION OF THE SOFTWARE TO ANY OTHER SERVER OR LOCATION FOR FURTHER REPRODUCTION OR REDISTRIBUTION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED, UNLESS SUCH REPRODUCTION OR REDISTRIBUTION IS EXPRESSLY PERMITTED BY THE LICENSE AGREEMENT ACCOMPANYING SUCH SOFTWARE.
“One of his projects was to manufacture thousands of ‘restore disks,’ usually supplied by computer-makers as a way for users to restore Windows to a hard drive if it crashes or must be wiped. The disks can be used only on a computer that already has a license for the Windows operating system, and the license transfers with the computer for its full life span. But computer owners often lose or throw out the disks, and…
Not speaking about this case specifically, but the existence of other more serious and/or violent crimes does not negate the impact of small crimes. You can't just say "yeah well there's a lot of unsolved murders so what about those?" as some sort of indictment against police officers enforcing laws.
Why the hell didn't the prosecutors just ring up the guy and say, "Hey, Microsoft is pretty pissed about these disks. If you don't [destroy them / remove their logo] we'll have to prosecute you."
They have exactly that kind of discretion.