Microsoft Drops XP Pirate Checks - bit-tech.net Forums

Tim S · 4th Jul 2006, 11:13

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/07...pirate_checks/

DougEdey · 4th Jul 2006, 11:17

That was a quick turnaround. Is it just the notifications being removed or the whole kit and kaboodle

Tim S · 4th Jul 2006, 11:22

I think it is only the notifications portion of the software - you will still require WGA for legitimately downloading non-critical updates.

DougEdey · 4th Jul 2006, 11:24

Doesn't matter for me anymore now, my OEM copies of XP PRO just arrived, theres not a single illegal copy of XP in this house. Not that there ever was...

jjsyht · 4th Jul 2006, 17:05

Taking a step back, this is so embarassing for a company like m$. First 'tricking' users into having WGA on their pc, then saying how WGA is essential and crucial for the users' security, and after lawsuits and complaints remove it. WTF are they taking us for???

They should really get punished in one way or they other. I hope the LA lawsuit really ____ them up.

Glider · 4th Jul 2006, 17:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjsyht

Taking a step back, this is so embarassing for a company like m$. First 'tricking' users into having WGA on their pc, then saying how WGA is essential and crucial for the users' security, and after lawsuits and complaints remove it. WTF are they taking us for???

Is it so weird that a company protects its products? They took a fall yes, but don't think this is over yet...

I find Microsoft perfectly in their right to enforce their EULA. But nowadays the society seems to have more empathy for thieves then for legit companies...

olly_lewis · 4th Jul 2006, 17:25

Well the people have spoken and Microsoft's "secret weapon" against piracy is a total and utter flop and looks like the users won't allow for something that invasive to be installed without their knowledge on their computers...
As well Microsoft, you tried, it was a valiant effort but a flawed one at that, better look next time, I... er... mean, there won't be a next time

Glider · 4th Jul 2006, 18:06

95% of the XP users don't even bother about the whole WGA thing... Only 5% (which mostly are either paranoid or use pirated copies...) complain about it... I'm 100% sure there will be something alike included in Vista... I think it's MS's right to protect their assets...

How would you feel if someone steals your intelectual property? Say, you are a writer and noone buys your books, just copies them? MS is big enough to survive mass stealing from them, but that doesn't make it right...

Maybe the way it tries to enforce their EULA isn't great, but at least they are trying something to cut down on the pirated copies... Which is a good thing...

koola · 4th Jul 2006, 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougEdey

Doesn't matter for me anymore now, my OEM copies of XP PRO just arrived, theres not a single illegal copy of XP in this house. Not that there ever was...

lol... ok yeah

I'll be buying some OEM copies when vista goes retail

Cobalt · 4th Jul 2006, 18:36

There were too many problems with it anyway. It said my legitimate install was a pirated version when I have the official MS packaging right in front of me. Now I have to use an illegal solution in order to use a genuine copy.

Thanks a lot MS grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Glider · 4th Jul 2006, 19:19

Cobalt, ever thought about giving MS a ring? They have a really good customers service, but that's for customers only, not thieving people

DXR_13KE · 4th Jul 2006, 19:49

Glider, one thing is to steal something and nother is to pirate something they are not equal, if you steal you are taking something from someone that will not have it anymore, you are creating a -1 environment, if you pirate something you copying something you are creating a -0 environment were nothing changes, if you dont pirate and dont buy you are creating a -0 environment as well.

i have a legal copy of windows xp home, i use it. if i wanted i could get the pro version with no problem and for free, i just dont realy care these days. i do download something from the intenet, but they are things that i need 1 time, for a project for school, to test.... NEVER TO SELL TO ANYONE!! this is what is creating the problems, if you pirate and sell you are creating a -n environment where n is the number of stuff you sell, that is bad for the company.

if piracy is killing companies what is lending stuff do? i have a friend that has books, i want to read a book, i dont buy it, as ask my friend for it, the creator gets 0 from me, this is the same as if i was downloading it from the net.

as for "How would you feel if someone steals your intelectual property?"

realy bad, but if the guy is only using it for himself and becomes a frequent user of my "intelectual property" someday he will buy a original, if he dident see my work in an ilegal way he would not buy anything from me. example? me i have some copies of some games from some creators, some of them are great and the originals are now in my collection (atari, epic, raven software....etc).

IF he is making copies and selling it to his mates and other people that is bad, in that case i would go and kick the crap out of him, or sue him.

Glider · 4th Jul 2006, 20:35

DXR_13KE, you have some points, but I guess our different views start with the definition of stealing... With you it's materialisic, mine is more diverse... Intelectual property also falls under my definition of stealing. If you take (and use) something you don't own, or own the right to use, then you are stealing.

So you are basically saying, if everyone downloads it's own pirated version, not intending to sell it to someone (but still using the same illegal copy), then it's ok. Your nice theory with the company losing n sales is flawed... If you are a everyday user (like it's the case with XP), but use a pirated copy, then the company has lost 1 customer... If n people do that, the company loses n sales... This has nothing to do with you selling your pirated copy, that just adds up to the loss.

Lending stuff is something else... If I lend you my bike, I can't ride it when you have it... therefor there's ony 1 "copy", no company loss because we can't have it both at the same time... This is very different with copies... That is 100% company loss...

And for you school project example, that's the reason there are demo versions... Or, like with XP, 30 days before you need to activate...

But you show the twisted views of people... If I don't have a loss, and my friend who I got it from doesn't lose a thing, then it's ok... You don't see beyond your nose, and see the company loss... And if someone defends the multimilion company's, the same (lame) excuse of them having enough money allways comes back...

DougEdey · 4th Jul 2006, 20:46

I'm afraid that I agree with Glider here, you are taking something which you do not own, you agree to an agreement that you do not fully read and by doing so you do not understand what it allows teh OWNER of the software todo.

DXR_13KE · 4th Jul 2006, 21:15

Glider you have very good points and a very solid conscience of stealing, but not everything is black and white, there is a gray area were i live.

Quote:

So you are basically saying, if everyone downloads it's own pirated version, not intending to sell it to someone (but still using the same illegal copy), then it's ok. Your nice theory with the company losing n sales is flawed... If you are a everyday user (like it's the case with XP), but use a pirated copy, then the company has lost 1 customer... If n people do that, the company loses n sales... This has nothing to do with you selling your pirated copy, that just adds up to the loss.

they would loose a customer anyway if people did not pirate, he would have to resort to open source. there are very nice distros of linux these days, or sell his computer, there is no logic in having a computer with no OS

this means that, not buying it = getting it ilegaly = using linux = not having a computer = 1 less customer = damage for microsoft. correct?

people normaly donwload stuff they dont have money for or cant get it legaly, they either use linux, sell their computer or pirate windows, there is no other choice if you cant aford to buy windows.

Quote:

Lending stuff is something else... If I lend you my bike, I can't ride it when you have it... therefor there's ony 1 "copy", no company loss because we can't have it both at the same time... This is very different with copies... That is 100% company loss...

lets do this in a more diverse way, less materialistic, If I lend you my original copy of soldier of fortune 2, I can't use it when you have it... therefor there's ony 1 copy, with company loss because you are using and enjoying it and you did not pay for it... That is 100% company loss... because if you bought it there would be 2 copies and 100% profit for the company. this also aplies to books you lend a friend, this also aplies to you listening a music on your friends mp3, cd....player, this also aplies to movies you see on a dvd in your friends house, etc.....

Quote:

And for you school project example, that's the reason there are demo versions... Or, like with XP, 30 days before you need to activate...

demo version with component limits, use time limit, save limit, code limit, file size limit, compilation times limit, simulation precision limit are of no use to me, expecialy were you need to implement a circuit with 25 components and can only put 20, or you can not save and have to re-mount everything everytime you want to simulante and a license costs as much as a new car.

Quote:

But you show the twisted views of people... If I don't have a loss, and my friend who I got it from doesn't lose a thing, then it's ok... You don't see beyond your nose, and see the company loss... And if someone defends the multimilion company's, the same (lame) excuse of them having enough money allways comes back...

i know the company looses for every item they produce, so they need to sell it, but if they see that they are selling less then the best thing to do is to reduce production and reduce the cost of sale or/and production, not run around like headless chickens crying SUE SUE SUE EVERYONE and loose even more money!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougEdey

I'm afraid that I agree with Glider here, you are taking something which you do not own, you agree to an agreement that you do not fully read and by doing so you do not understand what it allows teh OWNER of the software todo.

do you read your EULA everytime you instal something?

adam197 · 4th Jul 2006, 21:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE

they would loose a customer anyway if people did not pirate, he would have to resort to open source. there are very nice distros of linux these days, or sell his computer, there is no logic in having a computer with no OS

OR... he could buy a legit copy from Microsoft. Am I missing something here?

aggies11 · 4th Jul 2006, 21:36

I gotta agree DXR_13KE, it's high time someone starts realizing these truths.

Remember, the whole point of copyright was started NOT to protect the producers, but to protect society. If creators didn't have a little bit of protection to make some money off their innovations, then there would be no incentive for them to do it, and society would miss out on great innovation. The idea is to give people *just enough* protection to keep them creating.

Since it's inception all that has changed and it's now about "protecting peoples *right* to make as much money as possible". And most people in today's society agree with these principles. The best part though is for %99.9 of people, they will never see personally the benefit of this, they will never be on the creating side. It only benefits a small minority those that are wealthy and elite. Which is hardly benefiting all of society.

If people can not afford to have something of value, it is society as a whole that loses out. "They should have to pay for it like anyone else, it's not right".

"Stealing is wrong". It's supposed to be morally offensive. But is Britney Spears making millions off an album while poor children die starving all over the world, somehow not immoral? Which is worse, that, or someone downloading a song?

With intellectual property DXR_13KE shows how there is no real "loss" in it, anymore than someone borrowing a book of yours to read. Yet the argument always comes back to "Well, it's just wrong". Except that this is less a moral truth, and more of some social brainwashing that ultimately exists to benefit only a small minority of the people.

Sorry for the rant, but this is just a pet peeve of mine

Everything in life should be free. But that won't work, because people need to eat. But people don't need to be rich. And that there is the important distinction.

Aggies

Glider · 4th Jul 2006, 21:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE

they would loose a customer anyway if people did not pirate, he would have to resort to open source. there are very nice distros of linux these days, or sell his computer, there is no logic in having a computer with no OS

this means that, not buying it = getting it ilegaly = using linux = not having a computer = 1 less customer = damage for microsoft. correct?

people normaly donwload stuff they dont have money for or cant get it legaly, they either use linux, sell their computer or pirate windows, there is no other choice if you cant aford to buy windows.

I know, you are talking to one of the linux zealots

I use Gentoo Linux 99,9% of the time... But that's my choice, because I like the Linux way... But that doesn't change my stance on pirated stuff...

But your reasoning is flawed... Not buying it = getting it illegally != using linux... For most people Linux isn't an option... Because of the niche market Linux is in, the average PC illiterate a) doesn't know what Linux is (or that it even exists) and b) doesn't have the know how to get a base Linux desktop up and running (starting from scratch). The average PC illiterate knows 2 things: Windows and copying is easy...

Quote:

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE

lets do this in a more diverse way, less materialistic, If I lend you my original copy of soldier of fortune 2, I can't use it when you have it... therefor there's ony 1 copy, with company loss because you are using and enjoying it and you did not pay for it... That is 100% company loss... because if you bought it there would be 2 copies and 100% profit for the company. this also aplies to books you lend a friend, this also aplies to you listening a music on your friends mp3, cd....player, this also aplies to movies you see on a dvd in your friends house, etc.....

Yes, true, you are breaching the EULA, but not in a manner like in pirating. Lending =1 person is using at any given time; pirating = multiple are using it the same time... In terms of company profit they differ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE

demo version with component limits, use time limit, save limit, code limit, file size limit, compilation times limit, simulation precision limit are of no use to me, expecialy were you need to implement a circuit with 25 components and can only put 20, or you can not save and have to re-mount everything everytime you want to simulante and a license costs as much as a new car.

True again, some demo's are limited... But if your school requires you to use a program, they mostly offer you a student bulk licence (at least mine does) and they don't cost as much... Or use the program at school, where they have the licence

Quote:

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE

i know the company looses for every item they produce, so they need to sell it, but if they see that they are selling less then the best thing to do is to reduce production and reduce the cost of sale or/and production, not run around like headless chickens crying SUE SUE SUE EVERYONE and loose even more money!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There you really lose it... So you are basically saying (enlarged) that selling something with loss is better then selling nothing... Because you (not aimed at you personally) are willing to lower yourself to the reign of thieves, a company should throw out licences dirt cheap to stop you from pirating? That I call a reverse world... The company (MS in this case) sets it's price based upon features, R&D costs, but also based upon the costs to maintain the software (bugfixes, patches, Service Packs,...) I think a lot of people don't realise how much a (commercial) OS costs...

If you find the price to steep, don't use it... But don't be a hypocrite and whine about a $200 key when you have a pair of $500 graphic cards...

EDIT: Do you read a contract when you sign it? => Yes I read it (the first time) I install something...

EDIT2:
Welcome to Bit-tech aggies11... Don't take this personal

but...

Quote: