Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Passport: No Marylanders, Thanks
An Anonymous Cowardly Reader writes: "NewsForge is running a story about Microsoft's Passport service's terms of conditions, which effectively disallow residents of Maryland to use the service, and subject all users to Washington state laws, which they agree to by signing up." It's one case of unexpected consequences that the pro-UCITA forces may not have anticipated: states may pass (as Maryland did) versions of UCITA which unsubtly change the real effect of the law, and the changes may not be in the software makers' favor. Wasn't that "U" supposed to stand for "Uniform"?
Because Democrats love the idea of totalitarianism and will bow down before it. All Dems want the government to be in control of citizens' lives and if MS makes that easier, so much the better.
From the Urban Legends references pages:
http://www.snopes2.com/business/bank/guard.htm
"Whether Abagnale actually did this or merely attributed to himself a scam he'd heard about is debatable (especially since, as claimed in his memoirs, he supposedly pulled this off just one day after having been arrested by state troopers for impersonating a pilot, at the very same airport where they'd just nabbed him). "
Naa, they won't actively stop them from using it. But when they find someone they don't like, they can pull out their TOS and sue them!
Omly US Citizens have their TOS contract changed. Us others have to lump it.
It shouldn't have been there in the first place. If only a couple people complained, do you think Microsoft would have changed anything? Of course not. Do you think MS will keep the same TOS forever? Of course not. Once everyone has forgotten about the issue, they will change it back.
Rest assured, there are thousands of other contracts with similarily atrocious terms that will never be changed, because they will never garner enough public criticism to force a change. When a company gets caught writing outrageous contract terms, they change the terms and expect everyone to forgive them. Do you think we should forgive MS just because they gave in to harsh criticism?
i know
the socialists also wouldn't mind owning the general public
Maryland: Live FSF or die!
You fail to realize that once you are using a centralized login procedure, every member of the Passport network will be able to monitor your activities on all participating sites. They get a nice handy profile of you and sell it to whoever. They are making money from making you "log in" to their service. That's a fact. And of course, these data will be perfectly safe...and there will be noone trying to correlate them with your name...and your next boss will never get his hands on this data ... or your insurance company.
Wake up, people. You are already a row in too many database tables.
You have every right to do those things, if you never agreed not to. For the reasons the previous poster cited, the EULA on shrink-wrapped software does not count as an agreement (although someone like MS has the money to buy lawyers, judges, and legislatures as needed, and innocent people do tend to get screwed when they defend their rights against people with that much money and power.
However, if you are a corporate or other large scale user, MS insists on a real licensing agreement signed by an officer and legally binding.
Its not criminal court. There is no such thing as extradition in civil cases. More importantly a european could not sue microsoft under the laws of their country.
Its scary how many people believe what they read on slashdot.
They've passed laws to that effect (UCITA, that's what this is all about!)
> BTW I am seriously not making that story up. It was a con man who later wrote a book about his exploits.
My guess would be that you are refering to Abagnale. Just because it's written in a book, doesn't mean it must be true. Believing what you read without investigating/researching the subject is just as stupid as handing your deposits to a strange guy claiming to be a guard.
> Do a search and look for it
You do a search and find there is some suspicious things around the claim. For instance:
http://www.snopes2.com/business/bank/guard.htm
Take THAT! Microsoft and UCITA!
Okay, I live in Maryland. Let's say for a moment that I am brainwashed enough to use Passport. How can they stop me? They can't. And if I do use it and have cause to sue ... too bad for them: Trial is in Maryland.
MS might be big, but their policies do not carry more weight than even the small states' laws.
Ooooohhh lets all rag on MS for using standard EULA clauses.
Seriously though, this is nothing that suprising. Go read other EULAs. A bet 90% of them state that by using their software your agree to their EULA which is standard of cource. But in that EULA it will say that you agree to laws in the state that software company resides in. I wouldn't doubt that RedHat does that. SuSE might, but since they are not a total American company I don't know. But I bet a lot of American software companies, BSDi and Linux companies alike, probably say that you agree to the laws of their state. Not the state you live in. And I think that is perfectly fine. Lets say that Joe Blow starts a computer company. He desides to sell his own ver of GNOME. He doesn't put this clause in. Now some company in Hawaii wants to sue him because gnumeric crashed and destroyed their data. They sue him in Hawaii beacuse they the EULA didn't state they had to come to his state of Maine. Now unless Joe Blow wants to auto-lose his case, he must travel to Hawaii.
...and of course Microsoft's legal division will add a "choice of jurisdiction" clause that says that even if you're a small furry creature from Alpha Centauri, you're still subject to Washington state law in case any legal dispute arises.
...and, of course, the small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri are welcome to use their proton disintegrator rays should the Washington state courts find against them...
A more interesting issue not mentioned in the article is what's known as "choice of law," where courts decide which forum's laws should apply. (For example, for a suit brought in MD, would Washington or Maryland contract laws apply?)
We can presume that the license states that its terms are governed by the state of Washington. So-called choice of law clauses are common in mosty contracts. But courts sometimes instead use the principle of 'lex loci contracti'--that is, the place of the contracting provides the laws. For products purchased in Maryland, that might (or might now) mean Maryland and not Washington state law applies.
A few states, like Kentucky, have extremely aggressive application of forum laws in 'choice-of-law' cases.
There's a curious trend in the linux community to speculate on legal matters, so I thought I'd throw this into the mix. BTW, IAAL (sic--no N).
How else? Seriously, I don't see why not. The only other alternative is to have the software demand to phone home over the net, which is possibly a more popular method and used in Windows XP and .NET. In that case, rather than the company being authorised to hack into your computer, the company is authorised to sell you products that will intentionally cease to work if you don't keep checking in with the central authorities.
Where have you been, to not know this? Microsoft does this. Other companies do as well. I know that I (a Mac user) returned the mp3 player Macast for a refund because it continually lost its (paid for) registration and demanded to 'phone home' to confirm the legit number I gave it, eventually refusing to honor the number because I'd moved the app to different hard disks too many times.
This isn't the future- it's the past and present. Probably the best response is to continue to be ready to ask for your money back when your software turns out to operate this way, and/or just plain do without stuff that works this way. It's potentially quite a bit more intrusive than government.
So if you are a Microsoft user in Maryland, you have to be _extra_ good or Microsoft can sue your ass! O_O
From the article, "... it would seem that Maryland's UCITA would contradict itself in this case -- by giving Maryland courts jurisdiction over software disputes at the same time it ties the user to an agreement to use courts in King County, Wash."
It certainly didn't take very long for the foolishness of that UCITA law to become glaringly obvious.
Wansu, th' chinese sailor
Doesn't Washington State have that nifty anti-spam law with TEETH?
Get all the spammers to sign up!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
And what happens if someone signs up to Passport, and then moves to Maryland?
Would that make the entirity of the USA ineligible for the Pa$$port service, or just Washington state?
i think the court in question is here. perhaps people should get an idea of what sort of justice they might receive.
US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
I was gonna do a smartass Pokey the Penguin thing, but the fucking lameness filter ruined my spontaneity.
Thanks guys...
Your Working Boy,
- Otis (GAIM: OtisWild)
It's alright--we Southerners forgive you!
And it's worth noting that Maryland residents are not "effectively disallowed from using it."
They are able to use it, and Maryland's laws will protect them: if there's a lawsuit going on, it will be held in Maryland, and not in Washington no matter how much Microsoft may want it to be.
(So, Microsoft and WA government are in bed together, eh?)
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
"Store information in your Passport wallet that will help you make faster, safer online purchases at any Passport express purchase site." - from Passport.com main page.
Quoting your own advice, perhaps you should "...consider learning about what you're talking about before you go spewing at the mouth."
-
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
Don't get too excited. Microsoft has a couple options here: change Maryland law, change the TOS, or give up (potentially) billions in revenues by banning Marylanders in order to avoid the onerous task of changing the TOS. Which do you think it will pick?
"Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" -Salvor Hardin
> Hey can I play that game too! I don't believe that the moon landing occured therefore it's an urban legend! Wow this could be fun..
It could be if you weren't such a tedious troll. When you get a little more school, perhaps you'll learn about something called "burden of proof". In the meantime, thanks for illustrating exactly how credulous Americans are.
--
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
If perhaps you spent a little less time being smug, superior, and so much more enlightened than us rabble, you might have noticed that snopes put a white dot next to the report. When you use this astonishing faculty of reading and apply it to the legend for these dots, it means the story is unverified. Nowhere do they claim it's false. I sincerely doubt you read the page. Keep digging.
--
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
you gotta admit, that's not a compelling argument to the average user, who can barely remember their Hotmail password and has never even used Windows Update, who clicks on every damn thing you present to them.
The problem with this is the exact opposite of your argument: the average user will think its mana from heaven. Not knowing any better, they'll vote with their dollars.
ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
Well, it's nice to hear from an optimist. Doesn't seem the way to bet, but it's probably more comfortable.
Caution: Now approaching the (technological) singularity.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Bad idea. A better idea is for each state to make it's own rules, that change things in a way that is less objectionable. A "Uniform Commerce" act is desireable only when it's desireable, not just because it's another chance to pass a law.
Caution: Now approaching the (technological) singularity.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
I thought I read somewhere here that to use XP, you had to sign up with Passport. Of course, saying "I think I read on Slashdot..." is probably about the least reliable way of saying anything. Anyone who knows better care to comment?
So what happens if you live in, say, California, and your Delaware insurance company sues you? The trial takes place in California, but the California court applies Delaware law (if that's the law the contract specifies).
Bad example. Insurance contracts must be approved by the state in which it is sold before it can be sold. If you are a resident of California and you buy and insurance policy, the laws of California apply. Period.
If you live in Delaware, buy a contract and then move to California, the laws of Delaware, the state in which you bought the contract apply.
I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
are anything but. Several different kinds of national standards organizations propose and distribute "uniform" or "model" laws from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners to the people behind the Uniform Commercial Code. Each state decides if they will enact the model law as is or make changes to it. They do so usually by considering if the change puts state residents or domiciled companies in a disadvantageous position.
Virginia passed UCITA, VA is the home of AOL. MD passed a consumer protected (less consumer adverse?) version,
Contract law is state law. No one can agree to have the laws of another state apply unless the local state allows it.
I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
There has been many comments about the truth of this story, but I can tell you for sure that something - not exactly the same - but close happened in Denmark a couple of years ago.
:o)
Some people crafted a fake frontend to a night deposit box, placed it on the real one, together with a sign that told customers that the regular one was out of order and they should use the temporary one. It was apparently discovered after a couple of days and made the news.
The morale is: spend your money as fast as you earn them
Resistance is not futile - www.gnu.org
"I don't get to sign all my personal information and intellectual property over to Microsoft? DARN!"
== Paul Rickard, Editor of The Microsoft Boycott Campaign ====
Very similar to Judge Dredd, huh? Except that, instead of those kick-ass guns that Dredd uses, the MS judge will pull out a giant, shifty-eyed paperclip which will poke you in various sensitive areas.
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Please, people, consider learning about what you're talking about before you go spewing at the mouth. Passport.com has nothing to do with taking your credit card, or keeping more than a minimal amount of information, or anything like that. Passport is nothing more than a service designed to provide a single authentication mechanism for any service that wishes to use it (there may be licensing fees, I don't know). If Site X uses Passport for authentication and then asks you for your credit card number, Site Y that also uses Passport has no way of getting that credit card number. Why? Because (and pay attention, this is the kicker) Passport only provides authentication. Passport doesn't store that credit card number. All passport does is map an e-mail and password to a Passport ID. What tenant sites do with that is up to them.
If you're still all hot and bothered from the little TOS problem with Passport a while back, please realize that has been fixed, with both an explanation and apology from Microsoft.
I really don't get it. Microsoft screws up, and /.'ers bash them. Microsoft acknowledges the problem, fixes it, and apologizes, and they still get bashed. And they continue to be bashed for problems that haven't existed for a while. I guess I'll never understand that.
> I wouldn't doubt that RedHat does that. SuSE might, but since they are not a total American company I don't know.
Any of those limitations would be in violation of the GPL...
In simpler language... it would be illegal..
I don't actually exist.
A whole state is banned from Microsofts on-line services... .Net and a whole line of Microsoft products will also be banned from same..
Add
This is a bad thing?
It means a whole state will have to use Linux or Mac eventually.
This means a rather larg jump in the user count...
Want costumers in Maryland? Support something other than Windows...
I don't actually exist.
Microsoft has just put themselves in a VERY good legal position for dealing with residents of Maryland.
Scenario 1: Maryland resident sues M$.
Microsoft can simply claim that the resident was not an authorized user of their systems, and thus the case should be dismissed.
Scenario 2: M$ sues Maryland Resident.
The user will likely say "Oh ho! You cannot sue me under Washington law because of this clause!" but M$ will say that they were an unauthorized user, travel to Maryland (according to Maryland's law) and sue the user not only for the problems they caused, but for unauthorized use of their computer systems.
They've effectively created a system where they can sue but not be sued.
There's a bit in the Constitution that says "Congress shall have the sole power to declare war." Congress didn't declare it; therefore there was no Gulf War. Clearly the poster meant that they were a border state in WWII.
We had border states in the US during the Gulf War?
How odd....
These "you agree to the jurisdiction of.." clauses are somewhat problematic. A citizen may not have the authority or the power to choose which jurisdiction to which they are subject.
Of course, there's no *signature* on this agreement either, so I suppose that would be the first legal challenge, if there were one.
I was speculating about setup file license agreements a while back. Got submitted as an Ask Slashdot whether anyone thought this would be possible, but got rejected after a natter with Cliff. Oh well :)
Anyway. InstallShield is a solid enough, known format. How hard would it be to write a program which could take any of its installer programs, strip out the license and give you a new file? Sounds possible enough to me.
Greg
(Inside a nuclear plant)
Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!
Of course they will revise it again. Hey, even the lawyers who come up with such genious moves as forging evidence in court and just happen to write agreements where you sign over all your intellectual property to them will eventually, after many iterations, come up with something that might allow people to buy the software.
Was the requirement for a lawyer position at Microsoft that you'd pass a MCSE?
There are two separate issues. What you're thinking of are basically shrink wrap licences, though there may be a box to click on the screen saying "I agree" or whatever, these are clearly invalid under normal contract law principles and are something that UCITA is intended to validate (I've no idea why anyone would want to validate them, the idea seems insane). These don't work under normal contract laws because it's far too late for a seller to be proposing terms after you've already bought the product. It's your software and you don't need to enter into an agreement to use it (and yes, it is your software, just like if you buy a painting it's then your painting, you don't own copyright to it but you do own the item itself and can do as you please with it).
Click through licences on a web site, which is what Passport entails, are a completely different thing. In order to get the services you have to first click something to show that you agree with the terms, then the services are provided to you. This is standard offer, acceptance and consideration stuff. There is no reason to assume that these contracts are generally invalid.
IANAA:
I finally got around to reading something about this UCITA thing.
Geezuz-H-Christ!
Get rid of it, get rid of it!
It looks like a licence to screw the little guy.
IMO:
See, the problem with out-right capitalism is that it moves to turn everything into a commodity. Everything unfortunately includes information and legaslation.
Next thing, they'll start playing around with the constitution.
Federal law applies to interstate commerce. According to United States Constitution , article 1, section 8: "The Congress shall have power ... To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states."
Hmmm...I would think that would rip the guts out of any "choice-of-law" clause, unless (as I'm guessing here) there are no federal laws regarding online interstate commerce and licensing.
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
Ok, so here we have a case of a Washington company dealing with customers in Maryland. The WA company tries to place itself under WA jurisdiction. The MA people are under MA jurisdiction.
Since this appears to be a circumstance of interstate commerce, wouldn't it just be a helluva lot easier and more sensible to deal with this on the federal level? Who has jurisdiction over interstate commerce in the US? What laws, if any, would apply?
And how did you guys get into this mess in the first place?
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
There is nothing which says an enemy has to be compentent. Ask anyone from Eastern Europen
There's also that recently passed Federal law that recognizes "electronic signatures" based on key clicks and similiar trivial acts. As you can probably guess, I think that this bill goes too far because it's far too easy for action to not match intent (ever hit the wrong button?), to say nothing of the mischief possible with forged authorization.
On a related note to the prior post, the legal definition of "signature" is any tangible mark made by the hand. There's nothing about it being in "cursive," or even being your own name. That's why an "unsigned" check can still go through the system - the 'signature' is the rest of the check being filled out.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
Let me tell you a true story to illustrate exactly how stupid most americans are.
A con man one time rented a guards uniform from a local shop. He went to the airport with a stool and a hand made sign. He parked the stool in front of the night deposit box and hung a sign that said "night deposit box out of order please leave money with guard". He sat there for several hours collecting bags of money and went home.
Not one person said to thenselves "how can a night deposit box be out of order?". Nobody asked for and ID or credentials.
Americans see a sign and obey it, they see a person in uniform and do what he says.
So tell me will americans say "why should I trust microsoft with my credit card?" or will they simply hand over a bag of money to the guy with the guard costume on?
BTW I am seriously not making that story up. It was a con man who later wrote a book about his exploits. Do a search and look for it. I laughed my ass off about the time he ripped off prostitutes at a convention.
War is necrophilia.
He says he did. Somebody else says he didn't. I guess I get to choose who I believe since I was not there and did not witness the event.
I read the book and saw him on TV he seemed believable to me (I guess con man are like that).
I think I'll choose to believe the man seeing as how these bozos with a web site are unable to provide any evidence whatsoever about this story one way or another. It looks like they don't believe him so they decide it's an urban legend. Hey can I play that game too! I don't believe that the moon landing occured therefore it's an urban legend! Wow this could be fun..
War is necrophilia.
Burden of proof or not the website offers only one explanation as to why they claim this is an urban legend. They don't believe him. All they would have to do is to point out one piece of paper anywhere on this planet that told this story and predated his book and they would have had him.
You don't get to call people liars without offering some evidence to the contrary. They probably did not even contact the man and ask him to prove it. They did not offer to pay for a lie detector test, they did no research at all. They simply said "I don't believe it therefore it's an urban legend".
In the absence of any evidence whatsoever I get to choose who I believe. Present one piece of evidence to contrary and I may change my view.
Speaking of stupid americans. The only reason you don't believe him is because it says so on a web site. You were not there, you have zero knowledge of what may or may not have happened. You have one eyewitness to the story who claims it happened. You have zero eyewitnesses on the scene to contradict him. No matter how you count the evidence there is more evidence to suggest that it did happen then to suggest that it did not happen.
War is necrophilia.
Given two conflicting testimonies and absent any further evidence you can only rely on your perceptions of who is telling the truth.
The web site in effect states "we don't believe him therefore it's a legend". Given this weak of an argument It's astonishing that you would accept the conclusion of that web site over the testimony of a person who claims to have actually done the deed.
If you have some reason to believe the web site other then "cos I saw it on the web" please enlighten me.
War is necrophilia.
How is it that we allow this to go on? Oh yeah, everyone just clicks OK when the big box full of text pops up. We need to get used to this type of conflict, or start our own services like passport that aren't so silly in construction.
Based on what happened with this case, I doubt that'll happen. Microsoft wanted the UCITA, and its already causing them to (theoretically) lose users. Most people will just click thru and use the service without paying attention to it. Even if they did, how many people do you think actually read the UCITA? Or how many people do you think knew that despite the name containing the word Uniform, it isn't uniform between states? So this won't affect their userbase, altho it does cut down on the number of people theoretically able to use their software.
They'll probably just end up with a clause in the license that changes the problem parts for Maryland users. Like how the MSN Rebate terms were different in California. So the UCITA won't really make a difference.
Why is that? The part I quoted 2 messages up says usage is prohibited unless the license is 100% enforcable. Is there a law against having a clause like that? If so, I would agree with you.
If not however, I see things happening a bit differently. Yes, Microsoft would have to go fight the case in Maryland. But I think their case would basically come down to claiming that the user was unauthorized to use their systems. I have no idea whether that lawsuit would be worth persuing or not tho.
This is the problem:
Use of the Passport Web Site and service is unauthorized in any jurisdiction that does not give effect to all provisions of these terms and conditions, including without limitation this paragraph.
The problem is that the version of UCITA which Maryland passed specificly says that if there is a problem with licensing issues in Maryland, that the issue must be solved in Maryland, under Maryland's laws.
The Democrats are not unique in that regard...
Actually, Congress passed a resolution "authorizing the use of force", so that may have been considered a declaration of war.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
How many of you assemble a wallet and then hand it to some guy on the street who happens to be dressed in a pinstripe suit with a tie?
Look, I only did that once, will you stop hounding me about it?! Besides, he was very convincing. He said, "Wallet inspector. Give me your wallet."
You forgot about the charges for monthly updates.
(Microsoft comes around and injects your kids with the latest bugs going around.)
Nevrar
The slashdot articles should be moderated
I mean, IMHO, this particular one should be labeled Flamebait.
Nah. second thoughts... probably be labeled Funny
Nevrar
This is coercion, to the point of forcing individual States to pass laws favourable to Microsoft.
Given their Monopoly position this cannot be allowed to go on. States should be free to pass the laws their legislature deems appropriate without this kind of threat from a corporation. If Microsoft weren't a monopoly, then I'd say "Fine, it's their choice." but a monopoly cannot be allowed to withdraw it's services in this way.
To the snopes links, check out http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/1997/09/09/news/, which has YetAnotherMutation of the legend.
Grep for 'deposit'
--
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Actually you usually have the court case based in the state of sale.
Microsoft may want the version of UTICA that they originally supported. The "UCITA" law in Maryland is far from uniform with other states, or even the original UTICA. State legislators did what they always do, they tacked on ammendments, and changes parts. In the end, the one benefit to consumers, having uniform laws from state to state, is lost. What we end up with are a bunch of inconsistent laws, which cause everyone problems. Microsoft doesn't want to have lawyers consider 50 different state laws for the licensing agreements on their domestic products alone. Consumers don't have much of a chance of knowing all the laws, or even which ones apply. Legislation is usually a compromise, and as with many compromises, in the end no one is happy.
...since Microsoft was one of the big proponents of UCITA. Maybe the modifications Maryland made weren't toothless after all. (Maybe.)
--
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
On the one hand, yes, we'd be enabling people's bad habits to blissfully continue. More importantly, however, this would provide a service not only to those who would not take the time to read the document but to those who wouldn't understand it anyways.
I'm also responsible for all the dead links and bad design of any websites she came across. Needless to say, I'm ordered to 'fix' them.
Have you thought of switching to a brunette?
Kiwaiti
Member of the Legion Of Microsoft Haters
Huh? Why can't you use hotmail in Maryland? You don't need to use passport to use hotmail. As far as I know everyone can use hotmail.\ =\=\=\=\=\
=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=
Just because they automaticaly provide you with an account doesn't mean you have to use it. There are ways to log into Hotmail without using Passport.= \=\=\=\=\=\
=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\=\
Microsoft being a "rechtspersoon" (:=person as defined by a law) is subject to local law. A good example would be: can an american sue Shell? It is a British-Dutch comany after all. Like kv-tje writes a sale in a country is subject to the laws of that country. This case is made easier by the fact that MS has a specific office for the Benelux... All countries will strive to prevent allowing legal disputes at home being fought in a foreign country.
Speak for yourself, nobody else has.
:)
They're traitors through and through...
Comment from a friend at Univ. or Maryland (she was a local):
Maryland, Southern Efficiency with Northern Charm
There where part is determined by what courts can obtain jurisdiction over the party that does not want to be involved in the suit.
Pretty much every contract in existence has a clause that specifies what state's contract law is to be applied. Grab any random contracts you have in your file cabinet or safe deposit box and read them, and you'll probably find such clauses.
So what happens if you live in, say, California, and your Delaware insurance company sues you? The trial takes place in California, but the California court applies Delaware law (if that's the law the contract specifies).
Yep and then we'll all be naked sitiing in trees outside M$ headquarters.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
So basically M$ is using UCITA to prevent me from using the product because I am bound by UCITA. Forgive me if I feel a bit like Yossarian here.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
Don't get too excited. Microsoft has a couple options here: change Maryland law, change the TOS, or give up (potentially) billions in revenues by banning Marylanders in order to avoid the onerous task of changing the TOS. Which do you think it will pick?
I see it differently....
Don't get too excited. Microsoft has a couple options here: purchase a new Maryland law, change the TOS, or give up (potentially) billions in revenues by bombing Marylanders in order to avoid the onerous task of changing the TOS. Which do you think it will pick?
I think they'll pick the bombing option, which is similar to the crashing option. Just give Marylander's some free MS software designed specifically for Maryland. Continue doing this without mercy until Maryland submits. It's cheaper than buying a new law.
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
(M$ in a proper east german accent) .. ya,.. so
.NET, and this PassPort buisness, its is becomeing obvoius that M$ isnt an enemy, but rather a huge, bumbling, edit of a giant, and its only a matter of time before the giant trips over himeself, knocks his head on the ground, and sufficates on his own tongue. Really now its just sad. Its sort of like getting a fight with Ali, now that he has altimzers, its more sad, then intresting.
M$:Papers Please
user: uh.... uh.. here is my PassPort
M$:Your Papers are not in order
user: wha.. what?
M$:Your travels, say you started in Maryland
user:
M$:These are not Maryland Papers
user:..and
M$: You will have to come with us..
user:.. call my lawyer!!
M$: what do you think? this is a free country?
Back to reality, there was a time that I really belived that M$ was the enemy. That they must be stopped. Now with
It's an interesting point and one thaqt's been through the courts a few times.
.oO0Oo.
In the UK it's where YOU were when you did it. Like the guy who ran a US porn site from the UK. Because he uploaded the images from his UK residence he went to prison for distributing obscene material.
I'm sure legal types get questions like this in college.
"If I'm standing one one side of the state line and you on the other and I shoot and kill you, where did the murder take place?"
"What if after I shoot you you stagger and fall into my state and I go and stand in yours and watch you die?"
Stamp out crime, repeal all laws!
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
The MA people
Who has jurisdiction over interstate commerce in the US? What laws, if any, would apply?
Federal law applies to interstate commerce. According to United States Constitution, article 1, section 8: "The Congress shall have power ... To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states."
In other words, all your jurisdiction in interstate commerce are belong to U.S.Will I retire or break 10K?
"I read the book and saw him on TV he seemed believable to me "
Hello sir - perhaps i can interest you in this pyramid...ahem, i mean value added reselling scheme? All you need to do is to give me $200!
Hopefully maybe Microsoft will ban all its products from Maryland =) I suppose I can dream..
..There's a-dooin's a-transpirin'
A smart entrepeneur would go and buy a lot of cheap housing in Maryland, and sell (or lease) it off to Open Source Zealots.
It's foolproof, I tells ya!
--
...or am I missing something?
However you got a few facts slightly incorrect.
Children born in these states will not only get an NDA, but they will also receive a product ID, which their parents will have to activate with Redmond. If Bill doesn't like your kid, too bad !
And of course these states _will_ be more democratic, Micro$oft is constantly innovating in the area of Democracy. In fact Democracy XP(tm) will take democracy to a new level, never before seen.
There will be no law breaking, because as soon as you cross the street at the wrong time, a giant floating judge will appear and say 'It looks like you are trying to shoot your wife.' thus alerting everyone else to your intransigence !
I see all the negative moderators are out in force today...
Cav Pilot's Reference Page
Cav Pilot's Reference Page
UNIX - Not just for Vestal Virgins anymore
I think you're right that what they've tried to do. Interestingly, most companies aren't as arrogant and actually place in their agreements that some states may grant rights contrary to the agreement, such as in warranty clauses. But this one's interesting, in that IIRC a license is a strange animal in legal terms, and 'agreeing' to it, you can give up a lot of what one would think were legal rights, irregardless. What's interesting is that MS's .NET strategy is going after big business. I'd think if anyone was really going to look at this as suspect, it's going to be the lawyers from those same large companies that MS is looking to get their recurring revenue from the .NET. I think it's part of the arrogance that makes then think they can do anything, and all will follow. They may be right. Though given alternatives, they could be betting the ranch and not just a paddock or two. It does make an interesting publicity thing though. While they want UCITA passed everywhere (in it's vanilla form, of course), it seems state legislatures might get a little testy if this is put in their face... they usually have this 'states rights' things down pretty good, and aren't fond of 'outsiders' saying how they're constituants are gonig to be handled. If UTICA passes elsewhere, I get a strange feeilng there'll be a lot of similar 'maryland' type markups in the law before it goes to any vote.
yeah, either that or the civil war
---
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
Bren.
Of course, I seriously doubt that there is a way that hotmail could screen to see if someone is in Maryland, and even if they could, they would not exclude them from using their sercices.
But still, if I use hotmail, and the computer I am using it in is in Maryland, does that count? After all, the computer in Maryland is just a device to edit an html page on a server in California. How can the law stop me from using that computer for that purpose?
How can anyone say what the exact geographical location of an internet transaction? Is it where the client and server computers are located? Is it where the backbone and routers are located? Or is it where the individuals and corporations involved have their legal residencies?
So many questions...Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
The TOS still has been very strange, it wasn't a bug but intentional tought out by someone, but than again, a lot of TOS, licinses are very strange. Anyway I think password.com is extremely useful, It's annoying and does not feel right you'll have to reenter information on every site. The only problem might be that it is from MS, but it's not their fault no one else came with the idee sooner. In the Netherlands there's a plan from the goverment to give everyone his or her own 'digital save', this might be(come) similar too.
(-% TwistedMind %-)
Its not quite foolproof because "housing wants to be free"
sig's not here
'There is a Light that never goes out.'
I recently bought a copy of VC++ 6.0 at compusa for a client. I promptly went to the MS registration site to um, register it. In order to complete the registration, MS forced me to signup for a passport account.
Does this mean people in maryland can't register MS products.
Can it be that Microsoft is finally turning from evil to good? No, I don't think so!
I find your ideas intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
From higher in the thread:
Let me tell you... how stupid most americans are. ... Americans... see a person in uniform and do what he says.
From immediately above:
I read the book and saw him on TV he seemed believable to me. ... I think I'll choose to believe the man... [over] these bozos with a web site...
What an unusual way to illustrate your point.
Just because they automaticaly provide you with an account doesn't mean you have to use it.
Really? It's been my understanding that all attempts to log in automatically rerouted you through passport.com.
There are ways to log into Hotmail without using Passport.
Could you maybe drop me a hint about how to do that? I'd be much obliged.
Since what I know of this guy is limited to this thread, I have no real opinion on him one way or the other. I was simply highlighting two of your comments that seem odd when juxtaposed.
What I find astonishing is that you manage to be so derisive of an argument that boils down to "cos I saw it on the web", but have no more evidence to the contrary than "cos a con artist said so".
Given two conflicting testimonies and absent any further evidence you can only rely on your perceptions of who is telling the truth.
Granted. I just don't understand how you have enough evidence to be as certain of your position as you seem. Maybe if I read his book I'd be convinced, but given that he's a professional liar, I have to take everything he says with a sizeable grain of salt.
You don't need to use passport to use hotmail.
Sorry, you do. From Hotmail's TOS: "Some MSN Sites/Services automatically provide you with a Microsoft Passport account when you open an account (e.g. Hotmail, MSN Explorer),..." [emphasis added].
. Is there a law against having a clause like that?
I think so, something to do with illegal agreements are unenforceable or something.. I think each form of govt reserves the right to overrule anything beneath it..
But this is still a hoot.
We need a lawyer or law geek to go through this. I am interested in many of the sections that seemed to allow all kinds of consumer rights, but I might be hallucinating.
I am also wondering is this would mean that Windows would be outlawed in Maryland? [joke]
For example section 21-708. ADEQUATE ASSURANCE OF PERFORMANCE.
This sounds fascinating.
One part of the Maryland law is that One of the most contentious pieces of the Uniform Computer Information Transaction Act -- allowing vendors to remotely disable software on a user's computer if the user was in breach of the software's licensing terms -- has been modified. The change eliminates the provision for software sold via retail outlets. But is still an issue for corporate users.
Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
They might be interested in this piece of European legislation.
In short, it says about that...
Companies must notify both employees and consumers about how information collected about them will be used;
Companies can only use data for its intended purpose;
Companies cannot transfer data on employees and consumers to countries with inadequate privacy protection laws;
Consumers will have a right to access data collected about them;
Consumers will have a right to have inaccurate data rectified;
Consumers will have a right to know the origin of data about them (if this information is available);
Consumers will have a right of recourse in the event of unlawful processing of data about them;
Consumers will have a right to withhold permission to use their data (e.g. the right to opt-out of direct marketing campaigns for free without providing a reason);
Companies need explicit permission of consumers to process sensitive information, including information on racial origin, political or religious beliefs, trade union membership, medical data, and sexual life.
I can see it now, the M$ Hail$torm license agreement going like:
All your database are belong to us and in an event that your local laws conflict with our right of ownership of your data then Washington State laws and the word of our Lord Gates supersede such laws...
Well, they just might be laughed out of any European court.
For starters: Click through licenses are not legally binding in most European countries. And their certainly not binding when they conflict with mandatory local laws.
ich bin der musikant
mit taschenrechner in der hand
kraftwerk
Hubby: (under breath)Crap. HONEY?!?! WE GOTTA MOVE AGAIN!!
Distant voice of wife: WHAT YOU SAY?!?!
Hubby: MICROSOFT CHANGED THE RULES AGAIN ON WHERE WE WANT TO GO TODAY!
Wife: WE MUST HAVE BEEN ON THE PATH TO DISTRUCTION!
Hubby: I AGREE! MAKE YOUR TIME!! ALL OUR BASE ARE BELONG TO THEM!!!
Wife: OK! I'LL GO ROUND UP THE KIDS!!!
...
Blarf.
> "If I'm standing one one side of the state line
> and you on the other and I shoot and kill you,
> where did the murder take place?"
>
> "What if after I shoot you you stagger and fall
> into my state and I go and stand in yours and
> watch you die?"
IANAL... though I did tech support at a law school for 2 years...
If we assume that the criminal justice system's intent is to punish those who perform criminal actions, and not to serve vengeance in the name of the victims, then it would follow that the status of the offender is meaningful and the status of the victim is not.
In the first situation, the murder took place in the state where the man who fired the gun was first standing.
In the second situation, the same is true. The victims's act of stumbling across state lines is irrelevany, and the shooter's act of walking across state lines did not factor into the crime which was committed (though 'fleeing' the location of the shooting may be considered another offense itself).
I wonder why my post was moderated "Troll", it wasn't meant that way...I was very serious.
But on topic again: I suspect that you are right. Mangling the setup program could work too...perhaps someone already implemented such a thing. Of course, I fear that any court would rule such manipulation of executables as "criminal usage" or so.
The case that I actually removed the lisence file was accidental (just forgot to copy it...) I never claimed it would work on every setup.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
I wonder if this is true: if it were my software I would be able to disassemble it and make modifications to it. (Well, provided I knew assembler which I only know in very basic terms) I clearly am not allowed to do that as far as I know. As for the painting: I am free to rip it apart and make my own artwork from it, called "decadence of a disturbed mind" or so. You see ownership of software is quite "vage" and ownership of real things isn't.
As for the web-site approvals-click: I agree, you are right. I didn't think of it as an agreement of terms and services...but it is! I didn't pay a thing yet, and can still decide not to agree. I fear that I am not the only one who didn't realise the difference between the two.
My problem is that I can't read legalese and my guess is that most people can't. But of course I also signed the insurance of my car with just roughly skimming over terms and conditions. I guess real life and virtual life don't differ much in this question.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Now as a European I don't really bother too much about the UCITA, but woudn't there be a way around it? Consider this: I had a case where I copied the installable product from CD to harddisk, removed a text file called 'lisence.txt' and then launched the setup. The click through agreement said exactly nothing (empty textfield), so I clicked accept for a empty agreement. And don't say, I coudn't remove the lisence.txt file because up until then I did not agree to anything.
Oh, besides...does anyone remember those diskette pakages that said "if you open this package you agree to the encosed lisence agreement". I didn't notice them in ages, do they still exist?
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
I agree in principle, as I find new Federal laws generally about the most evil thing out there, but we have here a contract/law situation dealing not only with possibly conflicting laws in separate states (Article IV, Section 1 and maybe a touch of Section 2), but also interstate commerce (Article I, Section 8). The commerce clause has been pushed so far these days to force Federal power as to be rediculous, but this falls clearly within it. Libertarians might even go with that one if the scope were kept limited.
The only danger is that if big business got to write a national UCITA resolving law, there'd be no more safe havens. Well, there may be if states pushed the oft-forgotten 10th Amendment, but this power is quite specifically "delegated" as long as it retains a narrow scope.
Note that I'm not actually advocating a national-level UCITA as the laws in the states are, but a law to resolve conflicts and reaffirm basic rights of consumers (as well established by precedent) in interstate commerce cases.
please realize that has been fixed, with both an explanation and apology from Microsoft.
Explanation: "Oops, that was an old EULA, in effect for years, that said we own all of your information."
Apology: "We're sorry we got caught, we'll try to hide stuff like that better in the future."
Article IV, Section 1: Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State....
It would seem that in absence of a Washington law directly contradicting the distasteful-to-Redmond portions of Maryland's law, the law in Maryland would stand.
bit of article clarification... And this is not optional boys and girls, you can't just drop Marylanders because you don't like the laws there, because the Constitution forces it. Okay, if you had a brick-and-mortar chain and decided that Maryland's laws were restrictive, you wouldn't build a business presence in that state to accept clients there -- no problem. But MS already has a Maryland business presence, so they're screwed.
Continuing: ...And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
It seems that only a federal-level UCITA will solve this problem, but let's hope that consumer protection rather than rights-castration is the central point of that law. We do have a chance after the DMCA backlash, since Congressmen appear to be realizing that the people are starting to notice when Congress passes laws supporting big business at the direct expense of the people. The Internet's been a big help in that one.
I am a lawyer, I happen to have been advising on this one this morning, and you're right. The relevant law is to be found in Schedule 1 to the Data Protection Act 1998, Principle 8 of the eight principles listed there.
If you want to read it yourself, go to www.hmso.gov.uk and drill down to the legislation in question. I'd do an href but I can't be bothered.
-- AndrewD
A Maze of Twisty Little Laws, All Different.
I just looked through the Passport T&Cs (IAAL, btw, UK rather than US qualified) and there's one or two terms in there that would be unenforceable in english law (and probably in scots law as well), including the jurisdiction and choice of law clause as against a consumer.
Yes, Microsoft's T&Cs prohibit the use of their Passport service in most of the UK. If not all of it.
To use the lawyers' term of art, they can go pee up a rope.
-- AndrewD
A Maze of Twisty Little Laws, All Different.
Back when I worked for [multinational telco] they had all sorts of problems trying to make up ways to get round the legality of the London employees simply having their phone numbers stored on the US phone directory.
Does that mean Microsoft can stop annoying Europeans too? With luck they can close themselves out of every market soon.
So let me understand, this passport is no good in Maryland? What kind of a worthless passport is this? (I did not realize I needed a passport to travel across state lines.)
And when did MS think it was big enough to start issuing passports anyhow?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
--- -- - -
Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
Will we get to see the "Blue screen of Death" when Democracy XP(tm) crashes? Will we have to reboot the country, or just the economy?
At this rate, it's only a matter of time until we see the federated states of Micro$oft. Children born in these states will not get a birth certificate. They'll get a Non-Disclosure Agreement. These states will be more democratic that any state of the United states, because everyone of any age will be able to vote a shareholder meetings.
It will be a peaceful society, because all matters of law and justice will be resolved centrally in King County, Washington.
Oh, what joys we have to look forward to!
---
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
"Where do you want to go today?"
>Maryland
BSOD: An error occured int legal module 0C673E2.
Please relocate and try again.
This sig intentionally left blank.
I suppose this is the first of many criticisms of MS but it doesn't surprise me that they introduced us to Digital Divide 2.0 (PR1). Slicing up the US into UCITA Compliant and Non UCITA...even I gotta admit that's pretty slick in that shady kinda way...
:)
wish I woulda thought of that
BOSTON SUCKS!
So what happens in the case of an inter-country dispute similar to this?
Sorry, but I don't think you have all the facts. According to Microsoft, the plan is to merge Windows authentication with Passport authentication. Follow the link and check out the bit about E-bay. Without using Passport, Windows XP will be either hamstrung or totally unusable. You'll probably also have the Passport TOS stuck into the Windows XP TOS, which would ban it in Maryland.
This
Since Passport is closely tied into .NET through "Hailstorm", this might mean that you won't be able to use any .NET products (like Windows XP) in Maryland either. In effect, Micro$oft might have shut themselves completely out of Maryland once .NET arrives. This is almost too good to be true.
This
>"Microsuck" and Bill Gates only as "Herr William the Conqueror, Purveyor of Truth to the Unbelieving" Are you kidding? "Suck", "Purveyor", and "Conqueror" all in one sentence? Sales would improve tenfold. Won't Clinton be bummed when Microsuck doesn't live up to its name.
you gotta admit, that's not a compelling argument to the average user, who can barely remember their Hotmail password and has never even used Windows Update, who clicks on every damn thing you present to them.
Average user?....you mean my girlfriend? She doesn't need to remember any stinking password because it's me who check mails for her. Whenever the browser asks "Open at the current position/Save it" she will click the former without hesitation....of course, that includes open files like 'BO.EXE', 'ILOVEYOU.TXT.VBS', '1337!.EXE', etc.
I'm also responsible for all the dead links and bad design of any websites she came across. Needless to say, I'm ordered to 'fix' them.
Some folks have deep fundamental concerns with how Microsoft conducts business. I know I do. Microsoft causes me problems, because I chose to become a Microsoft customer in certain areas (my biggest concern now is with their server software), I now have new problems directly resulting from Microsoft practices and products. I feel I was sold a piece'o'crap, and spent some time thinking about why I feel this way. It turns out that Microsoft simply rejects many practices that I and others hold to be sound, ie., 'the right stuff.' Therefore, I myself will view with suspicion anything else that comes from Redmond. While Microsoft may fix problems that are so obvious that even the suits would say "thats broke," in other more subtle (and sometimes very important) areas, they remain as stubborn as ever and will not budge.
Theres no need for _me_ to iterate the problems I personally see with Microsoft, as my solution is easy. At some point I'll express my regret in making this choice (actually already have), recommend to my superiors that they find somebody more willing and better able to deal with Microsoft, then I will be happily on my way to whatever job better suits me. Believe me, flipping burgers will be a move up, for all you M$ fans ready to bash my obvious lack of skills ;-) I'll certainly not argue about any of that.
I hope this helps you see why some folks bash Microsoft. Some of us simply don't like doing business with them anymore and therefore view their every move with mistrust. Cheers!
ERR
If a company (any company, anywhere) uses any form of distant sale (specifically including on-line sales) to sell a product to someone residing on Belgian territory at the time of the sale, then that sale is covered by Belgian law...
For example, this gives the buyer the right to a seven day period in wich he/she can cancel the sale.
If M$ would not respect that (or any other part of the Belgian law regarding distant sales) the guy can sue M$ in any Belgian court: the sale was done on Belgian territory.
It is strange I know, but so are a LOT of things over here!
120 chars is not enough!
Generally, if states pass consumer protection laws, then that state's law applies in a lawsuit in which a Maryland resident would sue Microsoft. If Microsoft is suing a Maryland resident over Passport, I *believe* Washington law would apply.
What changes under Maryland's UCITA, Barve says, is the choice of venue provisions, allowing Maryland residents to keep their lawsuits at home if a judge so rules.
-- Grant, NewsForge
Grant Gross, Washington reporter, IDG News Service
Microsoft is probably not that bothered about the effectiveness of the disclaimer in the EU. Unlike the US civil trials do not have juries awarding inane amounts of money for coffee thats a bit hot.
Nor do class actions exist in which a bunch of crooks^h^h^h^h^hlawyers file a suit for damages on behalf of a class, then settle for $100 million in money off coupons for the class and $30 million in hard cash for their own extortion^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^hlegal fees.
In other words the legal system in the EU is not as corrupt and incompetent as that of the US.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
uhhh... so what? that is where the company is based, it is like paying tax when you order something online that is instate.
-----
-----
so i says to mable, i says
I wonder how this will truly hold up, as opposed to just stating X = X, lets face it, how many sites do you know of actually follow their policies when they create them?
Example, Hotmail, Yahoo, and others have policies against spammers sending from their respective domains, yet spam gets out and little is done to the users who send it.
Is the company creating these laws which are likely to be laughed at by the majority of the users via way of no one actually reading the implementations of those laws? Think about it, how many people actually sit there and read those rules?
Another odd question is, what does Microsoft expect do to should someone outside the US break those rules? Extradite a European to America for breaking Washington State laws? Get real.
I'm far from understanding the laws of their products, but one thing I could say is little will be done, by them or any other company building these assinine policies, so their ratio to capture someone who actually breaks their policy is going to be low, and should it be the other way around, they're gonna end up hurting themselves in the pockets when they try to prosecute millions of people and dish out legal fees out the ass. Either way I see it as a stupid move.
Blackbox pimps
360 degrees of Karma
Dear Mr. Gates,
Can you ban Ohio from your software too?
Thanks,
What is pirate software? Software for inventory of stolen treasure?
While we can laugh off Microsoft's unwillingness to deal with state law not weighing towards their legal advantage, we have to confront a serious problem here. Microsoft products are still legal in 49 American states, and that's a threat that we have to deal with, and soon.
If Maryland can implement laws which make Microsoft shy away, so can the rest of the states. For example, cigarrette manufacturers, in Canada, are required to have large warning signs on packets, explaining that cigarrettes can cause heart disease, etc. Why don't the fun-loving, legalised-pot-smoking legislators in California, for example, implement a law requiring Microsoft to refer to itself only as "Microsuck" and Bill Gates only as "Herr William the Conqueror, Purveyor of Truth to the Unbelieving" on products and in marketing. It might be an effective measure.
I think I'm moving to Maryland.
-- The avalanche has started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.
Yes, I love living in Maryland, even if this isn't a good thing, I'm proud to be a stumbling block in the way of world domination.
:)
My college sent a guy to work for Microsoft mere weeks before their security was compromised. He seemed like the patriotic type, although I doubt it was him. Whatever my state can do to help, we will.
(Being a border state in the last war gave us a bad image, we're sorry!
So much for the Global Community
"Where do you want to go today?"
Obviously not Maryland.
-Scott
Same as before - their Windows desktop crashes and hackers easily read their Hotmail correspondence. At least that part's uniform. :)
Invisible Agent
Invisible Agent
This post is a mirror; when a monkey stares in, no hacker gazes out.
Isn't Win XP going to use Passport for their registration verification scheme (i.e. making you call the company b/c your new computer information doesn't match the old stuff in their database) ?
If so, I'm moving to Maryland.
"Sometimes nothin' is a pretty cool hand." - Cool Hand Luke
That would be nice! I'm sure M$ put some similar legal mumbo jumbo on that screen we all press F8 on without reading. Maybe we could change our motto to "The first penguin state" :)
stop using stupid "secure software." Really now, do we need a Microsoft database full of your credit card and personal information? Passport is just another tool to help you be a good little consumer. How about you all say F that, and not be controlled by the big companies, whom you all blast whenever you can.
My point being, don't use it, it goes away. It's unnecessary and dangerous. How many of you assemble a wallet and then hand it to some guy on the street who happens to be dressed in a pinstripe suit with a tie?
Having been an advocate proponent of warning the public of the HailStorm services that Microsoft is pushing so hard I'm not surprised about Microsoft's current practices. Many people were once worried that the government would slowly make it so that you were entirely dependent on them. However it would seem that the government isn't the one to be concerned with in this practice anymore, rather it would be Microsoft.
It definitely is disturbing to think that they are willing to sue the user for misuse of our own information. The fact of the matter stands, IMHO, that Microsoft is basically trying to make the public think that they really hold all the answers. Quite frankly I think that it was a sign from God when the earth quake stuck last year and nearly made Seattle fall off the coast.
I am but mad north-north-west: when the wind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw.
That makes teh line in MD's state song: "The despotes heel is on thy shore..." more appropriate today. -jlc, from north of Bal'imore, MD
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.