Microsoft Backs Down on Windows 2000 EULA

nachoboy writes "After the fiasco surrounding the overly intrusive EULA for Windows 2000 SP3, it seems Microsoft has backed down a bit with the upcoming release of SP4. The section concerning automatic updates now states simply "You consent to the operation of these features, unless you choose to switch them off or not use them." The EULA then proceeds to list the five services liable to connect to the internet without explicit confirmation. A reference copy of the SP4 EULA may be found here. We can only hope for a similar move with Windows XP."

Comments

Re:great

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently Windows Upbreak decided to update a bunch of stuff that required the new video driver before it updated the video driver itself.

Apparently you never looked at Windows Update enough to realize that you can control the order of the installation. Want to do driver updates first? No problem. Oh wait, it is easier to complain and blame Microsoft.

This may help in the future

[teamhasnoi]

Removing evil from 2000/XP.

I can't wait til this is done, as I use 98lite for the pentium 233 here at work.

Speedy goodness, and I feel a bit better about the saftey of my midget porn.

Does this have anything to do with SP4? I don't know. I just wonder what SP4 will break.

Re:This may help in the future

[Jack Comics]

XP Lite is complete and total vaporware. It's been promised for *years* now, and absolutely nothing new has been said or seen about it since it was originally announced in 2001.

The project probably turned out to be bigger than the software coders could chew, as removing the crud from 9x is a far easier task than removing it from 2000 & XP.

In other words, expect XP Lite to be released the same day as Duke Nukem Forever.

Re:Does Microsoft still support Win2K??

[MtViewGuy]

According to Microsoft's position, they will officially support Windows 2000 Professional/Server right through the end of 2005.

This means they will still have the signed driver program and WHQL certification program in place for the next 30 months. I expect Microsoft to offer at least up to Service Pack 6 for Win2K before the official support program ends at the end of 2005.

Besides, Windows 2000 Professional is a very nice OS, with very good stability and decent security if you apply all the proper security patches (something that should be done on all operating systems on a regular basis).

Liability

[jabbadabbadoo]

"..., IN NO EVENT SHALL MICROSOFT OR ITS
SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL,
INCIDENTAL, PUNITIVE, INDIRECT, OR
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER ..."

What a cumbersome way of saying NO LIABILITY.

(the text you're reading now is just to fool /.'s lameness filter which claims that I'm yelling due to CAPS - well, actually it's Microsoft who's yelling.)

Re:great

[RealityMogul]

SP3 killed my machine. Here's a tip, don't play minesweeper while waiting for the service pack to install, you won't be able to boot again.

Read up on Corporations...

[cnelzie]

Any corporation, no matter how large or small has a Board of Directors. The board is made up of people that are voted into positions, by the shareholders.

In the case of a really small company with only a few shareholders, those shareholders (if even only 2 or 3 people) will typically make up the board.

Re:Read up on Corporations...

[Reziac]

"The board is made up of people that are voted into positions, by the shareholders."

Actually, that's not how it works. What happens is that whenever there's a vacancy, the existing Board of Directors nominates a candidate. Then the board issues voting materials (an info packet and a ballot) to shareholders, where you can either vote for the candidate, against the candidate, or in some cases abstain.

Now, these ballots are interesting in that FAILURE to vote usually means that your ballot is DEFAULTED to a vote FOR whatever the BoD has *already recommended* (and in 33 years of owning stock, I've never seen one that recommended a vote against any prospective or seated Board member). With such ballots, if you don't vote, it does NOT become a null vote; if you want to abstain, you have to specifically vote that way and return the ballot.

This is the procedure for seating new members, for reconfirming old members which is normally done every few years, routine issues like confirming selection of an auditing firm, and issues placed on the table by stockholders (which in my observation are uniformly nutty and are uniformly recommended against by every BoD).

Re:the catch is....

[praedor]

You could link your 2000/XP box to a linux firewall and set iptables to drop any and all traffic concerning certain M$ spyware/snooping/DRM crap. Prevent media player from sending anything to M$ to get around that snooping/IP police force nonsense they add.

Block the ports that M$ tries to use, block offensive traffic. Screw the EULA.

Re:Not as good as it seems

[bjorng]

You buy Windows XP workstation and you actually receive a license for every prior (non-retired) workstation product, provided you uninstall XP before you use, say, Windows 2000 workstation.

Not according to M*ft's legal brochureware. They claim that using an XP license to install w2kpro is a violation. We had to look that up at work a while ago. (IANAL, though.)

Re:Not as good as it seems

[sheldon]

"Not according to M*ft's legal brochureware. They claim that using an XP license to install w2kpro is a violation. We had to look that up at work a while ago. "

It depends on how you obtained the product. Volume Licensing users automatically have this right.. (search for downgrade)

Retail purchasers are supposed to ask for permission.

Who cares about MS License Agreements?

[HermanAB]

In many (most?) states, it is a sale, not a license, so the EULA is moot.

Re:Not as good as it seems

[Yankovic]

This is incorrect. More recent licenses (such as the one on SP4) supercede previous agreements. This section from the EULA clearly identifies this:

19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This EULA (including any addendum or amendment to this EULA which is included with the Product) and the CAL or TS CAL (if applicable) are the entire agreement between you and Microsoft relating to the Product and the support services (if any) and they supersede all prior or contemporaneous oral or written communications, proposals and representations with respect to the Product or any other subject matter covered by this EULA.

Re:the catch is....

[ncc74656]

Prevent media player from sending anything to M$ to get around that snooping/IP police force nonsense they add.

Better yet, use Windows Media Player 6.4. Even after you "upgrade" to later versions, it's still there...even on this WinXP SP1 box I'm using right now. It plays all of the same stuff that the later versions play (at least I haven't found anything that wouldn't play), the interface is much less obnoxious, and it doesn't "phone home" every time you start it up. You should be able to find it as c:\Program Files\Windows Media Player\mplayer2.exe. Use right-click and "Open With..." to associate media files with it instead of wmplayer.exe.

What about the DRM Clause? Still awful!

[Anonymous Coward]

Under this clause, they can:

1) Record what you're using their and 3rd party
software for

2) Remotely retrieve this information

3) Remotely disable features of your computer

If that isn't intrusive, then what is?

d. Windows Media Digital Rights Management.
Content providers are using the digital rights management
technology for Windows Media contained in this Software
("WM-DRM") to protect the integrity of their content
("Secure Content") so that their intellectual property,
including copyright, in such content is not misappropriated.
Portions of this Software and third party applications such
as media players use WM-DRM to play Secure Content
("WM-DRM Software"). If the WM-DRM Software's security
has been compromised, owners of Secure Content ("Secure
Content Owners") may request that Microsoft revoke
the WM-DRM Software's right to copy, display and/or
play Secure Content. Revocation does not alter the
WM-DRM Software's ability to play unprotected content.
A list of revoked WM-DRM Software is sent to your
computer whenever you download a license for Secure
Content from the Internet. Microsoft may, in
conjunction with such license, also download
revocation lists onto your computer on behalf of
Secure Content Owners. Secure Content Owners
may also require you to upgrade some of the WM-DRM
components in this Software ("WM-DRM Upgrades") before
accessing their content. When you attempt to play
such content, WM-DRM Software built by Microsoft
will notify you that a WM-DRM Upgrade is required
and then ask for your consent before the WM-DRM
Upgrade is downloaded. WM-DRM Software built
by third parties may do the same. If you decline
the upgrade, you will not be able to access content
that requires the WM-DRM Upgrade; however, you will
still be able to access unprotected content and
Secure Content that does not require the upgrade.
WM-DRM features that access the Internet, such
as acquiring new licenses and/or performing a
required WM-DRM Upgrade, can be switched off. When
these features are switched off, you will still be able
to play Secure Content if you have a valid license for
such content already stored on your computer.

Re:What about the DRM Clause? Still awful!

[unDiWahn]

"1) Record what you're using their and 3rd party
software for"

I didn't see any reference to that in the clip you posted. The closest segment was "Microsoft may, in
conjunction with such license, also download
revocation lists onto your computer on behalf of
Secure Content Owners. " which is simply Microsoft 'turning off' any software you've cracked -- " If the WM-DRM Software's security
has been compromised, owners of Secure Content ("Secure
Content Owners") may request that Microsoft revoke
the WM-DRM Software's right to copy, display and/or
play Secure Content."

Ok, 2) falls under the same catagory.

"3) Remotely disable features of your computer"

Only features that companies select to be disabled. And, specifically, only DRM enabled software for DRM content -- which does not prevent you from from using non-DRM content either.

Actually, the clip you posted was a relieving read -- Microsoft's EULA for DRM is mostly non-invasive. It says nothing about accessing content on your computer, and specifies that DRM information will only be transfered when you request a DRM licence. Seems fair to me.

Pixar is publicly traded

[kels]

there's no reason a corp. can't stay private -- I believe Pixar is one of those

PIXR

Re:As if the EULA mattered

[Anonymous Coward]

ipconfig /flushdns

Or better yet...

[Kjella]

...get Media Player Classic from here. A reimplementation of WMP6.4 + some various other stuff, like DVD playing without compromising simplicity. My default media player without a doubt :)

Kjella