Microsoft To Begin Checking For Piracy

Curious Yellow 82 writes "Microsoft will begin checking for pirated copies of its Windows software when users attempt to update. Security updates are supposed to be exempt from the check. Upon detection of pirated software the user will be given the oppportunity to purchase a legitimate copy of the software for a discounted price, upon providing proof of purchase etc."

Comments

Uhh

[daveschroeder]

the user will be given the oppportunity to purchase a legitimate copy of the software for a discounted price, upon providing proof of purchase (!!)

That will be an interesting feat.

And, jokes aside, "proof of purchase" of what? If they mean a possible purchase of a machine with, or a standalone copy of, a counterfeit version of Windows, assuming the user purchased it legitimately in good faith, how in the hell is this the user's responsibility or fault? I'm not talking about someone who got Windows from a guy in an overcoat for $10 on a street corner (not to mention you probably wouldn't have a "proof of purchase" for that kind of sale); I'm talking about purchases reasonably believed to be legitimate. No, this doesn't mean that a software company has to honor pirated or illegal copies even if the user believed it to be legal for whatever reason, but it seems like this really sticks it to the user (not to mention the internet community as a whole by not providing OS updates, the fact they claim to be providing security updates aside[1]) as opposed to working to target the entities they believe to be illegally selling Windows...especially if the customer has a "proof of purchase" of an illegitimate copy of Windows in the first place, which presumably contains some element of contact information for the source if it can reasonably considered to constitute any semblance of "proof of purchase". They should be offering amnesty and/or discounts to people who are running straight-up pirated versions of Windows with no "proof of purchase" at all, if this is any attempt to reach out to people running unlicensed copies!

(Make no mistake: I'm not saying Microsoft is obligated to honor illegally purchased copies of Windows, whether they're pirated, or even ones purchased innocently and in good faith. But they'd be a hell of a lot better citizen of the internet community if they didn't withhold updates in either instance.)

[1] Windows Service Pack 2 would apparently not be included in this, for example, because it's not a "security update"; but it can be strongly argued that SP2 did more for general Windows XP security than any "security update" ever has. In other words, not updating the multitude of for-whatever-reason non-legal copies of Windows out there does everyone involved a major disservice, not the least of which is the rest of the world surrounding them.

Re:Uhh

[Ingolfke]

If I bought a new DeWalt drill for really cheap of the Internet, it broke, and I went to get it repaired only to find out that I had purchased a knock-off product I wouldn't expect DeWalt to fix it. I'd go to the vendor who sold me it and take whatever action I could against them. Why is Microsoft any different?

Re:Uhh

[BVis]

Your DeWalt drill doesn't cause problems for other people if it breaks. Windows installations missing security patches (as people will shut off automatic updates for fear of being caught) become zombies very quickly, adding to the spread of viruses, spam, etc.

Also, the copy of Windows in question isn't likely to be a knock-off, it most likely is the same OS that you can buy off the shelf. A better analogy would be if you bought a genuine DeWalt drill from someone who wasn't an authorized DeWalt dealer, and the (genuine OEM DeWalt) batteries had a habit of exploding and hurting people around the user. More than likely DeWalt would issue a recall on *all* batteries, and more than likely they'd be pretty lenient about making sure the drill was purchased through authorized channels. In essence, the safety of the community would take precedence over the other factors involved. (Also, the effort to check where the drills came from would cause serious headaches, logistically. It would be more expedient to just replace the battery when it's sent in and not worry about the legitimacy.)

Granted, we're talking about risk of physical injury vs. network security, but IMHO the obligation is the same: if you put out a broken product, you have an obligation (IMHO) to put out a fix. Anything less is corporate irresponsibility that could subsequently expose the company to liability, should a loss occur.

Of course, MS doesn't care about that, since they have better lawyers than just about anyone else.

Trustworthy Computing?

[Helmholtz]

Perhaps I'm just being cynical, but doesn't this place the incentive on insecure code. Maximizing the number of "security patch releases" will also help (potentially) maximize revenue by quickly identifying "pirated" versions of Windows, causing said "offenders" to purchase legit versions.

If Windows were to become secure and relatively bug free, this would cause their "pirate detection" system to become very inefficient, as there wouldn't be a great need for using Windows Update.

I may be completely off base, but it does seem plausible. Perhaps we need Mythbusters ;)

Re:Yawn

[Kenja]

"Bambino's don't do this"

Sorry, but if I buy a computer that comes with a pirated copy of the OS (from a white box OEM) I will go after them tooth and nail should I find out.

I write software for a living. So long as I expect to get paid for my work it would be very hypocritical of me to support the illegal software trade.