Slashdot Mirror
Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries
applejax writes "SecurityFocus is running an article regarding some concerns about Vista's activation terms. Do you have the right to use properly purchased but not validated software? What happens if Microsoft deactivates your OS that was legally purchased? The article goes into some detail about Vista's validation and concerns." From the article: "The terms of the Vista EULA, like the current EULA related to the 'Windows Genuine Advantage,' allows Microsoft to unilaterally decide that you have breached the terms of the agreement, and they can essentially disable the software, and possibly deny you access to critical files on your computer without benefit of proof, hearing, testimony or judicial intervention. In fact, if Microsoft is wrong, and your software is, in fact, properly licensed, you probably will be forced to buy a license to another copy of the operating system from Microsoft just to be able to get access to your files, and then you can sue Microsoft for the original license fee."
For those who sleepwalked through past adventures in "keeping you and your data apart": This "feature" exists only for the purpose of DEACTIVATION, so let's be honest and call it that.
Switch to something that's AlwaysActivated(TM): Linux, OS X, BSD, Solaris 10. Then we can talk about genuine advantages. As in "genuine" and "advantageous", rather than "marketingspeak" and "sure to bite you in the ass".
you had me at #!
This is why I'll never upgrade
Our company did last year, cities of Vienna and Munich did, it should work out very nicely for you too. Our former XP users love KDE.
No need to put yourself through pains when you can improve security, save money and achieve a good deal of vendor independence all at the same time. Why support the Microsoft monopoly by paying ridiculous prices for bug ridden software with DRM restrictions, when you can run Free software on the industry standard (and thus inexpensive) hardware?
Knowing everything I know now, I only regret that we did not migrate to GNU/Linux sooner.
Does it mention Vista being the only os?? Or you must agree not to use Vista in order to reverse engineer the executable format or clone the libraries?
-b.
Or, I could just not purchase Vista and not have to worry about it.
Problem solved!
bork bork bork!
is this water getting toasty, or what?
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I've seen this on a lot of non-open source software, not just windows. Even free-as-in-beer non-open-source stuff. Just something to consider. By pointing out Windows as some kind of oddball case, it just tells me they don't read most of their EULAs
34486853790
Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
Hmmm... I think I've heard of that once or twice. I guess it doesn't affect me since I use an OS free of restrictions: Linux. Ballmer can bite me.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
I'd be willing to bet that it would never get this far and MS would just take care of it. They wouldn't be afraid of someone suing them over a license. That's petty to them. Maybe if a company sued because their software was legal and got a false positive on being illegal and it caused down time, now that's something to sue about. It's a shame that Microsoft doesn't care about their customers enough to make sure things like this wouldn't happen.
That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
I guess "Microsoft deactivated my Windows license last night, I couldn't finish my paper." will become a common and valid excuse.
I wonder about the software functions which are there to enforce these bits of the EULA. How secureare they? How easy do you suppose it will eventually become for anyone to point a script at a Vista box owned by someone they don't like, and send instructions for the box to shut down with extreme prejudice and turn the user's data into chunky salsa?
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
I have learned some valuable lessons regarding my data. I keep all my stuff on my external drives. Hope it will not be affected in case I decide to use Vista.
and then you can sue Microsoft for the original license fee.
I thought the new vogue in EULAs nowaways was a clause stating that by using the software, you give up the right to any litigation?
Over here in the OS X toad pond it's nice and cool.
I hear the newts over in the Linux pool have the ideal temperature though...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
This is why I use my Linux box more and more every day. By the time M$ requires the Vista upgrade, I won't need it anymore. Besides, AIGLX, XGL and Beryl are so much cooler than Aero.
Check out Sabayon
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
This is almost word for word what the fear mongers where saying about XP. Yes software activation is a pain. But so are pirated copies of windows sold as being legit. Which is what this is trying to stop. Yes there will be cracks and work arounds, there allways are. But if your mom buys a computer from the corner store, this will check to make sure that its legit. Microsoft can not remove your access to the files unless they're doing on the fly encryption. They also have no reason to do that. Much like the XP activation, in the case of an illiegal copy Microsoft has been very good about working with the end user to find a resolution.
Bottom line, if you dont like it dont use it. For the non geeks this is a good thing as is the whole bundle of software signing and certs that Microsoft is trying to get out there. People dont want to have to understand how the computer works, they just want to download software and have it do its thing without sending porn spam to half the country. If things like this worry you or you think they're not needed. Then perhaps Windows is not the right OS for you.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
It seems to me Microsoft wants a constant surveillance license check to happen and they took steps to make it happen without considering that the average user is not going to want to deal with these complications and will likely stay with XP or switch to MacOS or an easy Linux install like Ubuntu. Of course, MS will probably respond by end-of-lifeing XP, but will that give them the desired result or alienate more users?
You'd think a multi-billion dollar company would have enough to fund a "common sense" committee somewhere.
-Now I may be an idiot, but there is one thing I am not sir, and that, sir, is an idiot.
UCITA proponents claim that it's not illegal and, in fact, the UCITA actually would impose stricter limits on its use. I'm not convinced, but ...
u niformacts-ov-ucita.asp
http://www.nccusl.org/update/uniformact_overview/
"Under current law software and information can be recovered by electronic means if there is no trespass or breach of the peace. Thus electronic self-help in the event of a material default by the licensee is unrestrained under current common law. UCITA does not permit electronic self-help unless the licensee separately negotiates and assents to it and imposes very substantial due process and other limitations on its use."
I see having two (three) computers going forward.
1) A linux box that I use for important data - tax records, personal documents, any think like mp3's, etc.
2) A windows box that I use for entertainment (certain games) and at large companies. Since computers have been powerful enough for home use since about 2000, I can't see paying more than $499 for this and then $200 for a video card. The hardware would cost me $400 to scratch build (and $200 for the card) so I guess the OEM is splitting the $99 with Microsoft. Going forward, i'm less and less likely to use Windows computers for anything important. I'm too concerned about snooping, losing access to my own data, etc.
3) And a console for pure gaming on my big screen TV.
---
To reach this point, I've converted about 99% of my software to java, open-source applications.
Openoffice
Audacity
Gimp
Azureus
Firefox
and a few other minor programs.
I have two documents that I have to use Word for. I'm considering splitting them down into smaller documents.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
This is exactly why I bought a Mac. Because I understand the underlying nature of the operating system. I know what is and isn't on the thing. I know what DRM is installed on the thing. And I know that by purchasing the hardware I am granted a license to run the Operating System. And I don't need to worry about apple disabling my computer down the road. I'm sure someone will point me at the tyrannical and cyncial nature of OS X's Eula as well (And yes I know about the broad ranging data sharing) but the fact is, these agreements have so far crossed the line that I doubt any of it will remain enforcable in a court of law. I'd install Linux on the thing, except Microsoft has its hooks into that as well, at least according to its lawyers.
What happens when somebody in the Redmond Bunker mistypes something and deactivates Sally Jones instead of Wally Jones? Or what if some enterprising young hothead cracks his way into the validation servers and starts deactivating people at random? What if they go out of business? What happens to my data then?
I won't allow some company in some foreign country to control whether I have access to my data or not.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Apple don't sell it to run on whitebox (unlike MS). There's no comparison.
(Personally, I don't think it would be good for anyone if they did.)
you had me at #!
I'm disappointed by the summary's FUD.
I don't like MS as much as the next guy, but proclamations like this just make MS look good.
They just wouldn't revoke an OS license for many reasons:
1. ANY copy of the OS in use is a win for MS. They don't want to make it impossible to steal. Just hard enough so fewer people can steal it. As protection schemes are cracked, they have to come up with another. They have to keep up appearances.
2. Revoking the wrong desktop/server will generate too much fear and drive now-uncertain users to other platforms. So they can't really do it.
Vista is STILL the silent personal media rights killer well on it's way to becoming a set top box. But articles like this make it very easy to justify the claim that there are "linux zealots."
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
What happens if Microsoft deactivates your OS that was legally purchased?
Uhh, nothing! You are hosed. I am pretty sure Windows XP Pro already does this, thanks to that Window Genuine Article(?) update. After I installed a LEGAL XP copy windows went to validate and it said, sorry, you are SOL because it was already registered (I had installed it on another machine that died). I had to find another copy to use, which I happened to have because I installed Ubuntu on another machine the OS CD came with...
"The first problem is, you may think you bought a copy of the operating system. Actually, the OS is still owned by Microsoft."
Not at all sure this is true. Not that, maybe, it makes all that much difference in practice in this particular instance.
If they own it, its an asset, it must have value, be on their books, be depreciated. None of which is true. But it is on your books, and you can depreciate it, write it off against taxes and so on. If we're saying, it is theirs, you have licensed it, by a one time payment with no further obligations to them, how does it differ from a sale except in name?
I suspect that legally what is going on is that you have bought your copy alright. Its just that what you have bought is a product with certain features/limitations, of which activation is one.
This probably doesn't matter when it comes to the present situation, because product activation and so on are just part of the product. But if it were a case of stopping you from moving it from machine A to B to C, it might. If they were to tell you what machine to install it on, it might matter also. Or, whether you can run it under Wine. In all those cases the difference between them and you owning your copy might matter a lot. But not in terms of what features it has.
All the same, I think you bought your copy, and you really do own it.
Rather than trying to stop the approaching at full speed express train with your own body, wouldn't it be smarter just to get the hell out of its way, such as migrate to GNU/Linux?
Sure, there is lots of extremely expensive software that requires Windows to run, and is impossible/too expensive to replace. Now tell me, how much critical software there is that requires Windows Vista to run? Besides, I can't help but wonder why so many people flaming Google for 'controlling all of your private email, search logs and documents', but so few of them notice that Microsoft is doing [and has been doing that for many years] basically the same.
I don't like product activation, not because M$ can arbitrarily disable my computer. I guess they might have expanded powers with Vista, but no real history of doing it. I don't like it because it gives them the ability to time limit the use of the software. Suppose I have a retail copy of XP Professional, which I really like. Sometime down the road my computer gets struck by lightning and M$ has determined that the life cycle of XP is complete and will no longer activate it. Then I am stuck with a worthless piece of plastic. Of course with an OEM version I suppose if your computer gets hit by lightning, then it blows up your software license at the same time.
"standardisation"? Which internationally recognized entity publishes the human-readable exact definition of a conforming Microsoft Word or Microsoft Excel file? Real standardization is ISO/IEC 26300, the OASIS ODF spec. With "ISO" being a buzzword (even in Tetris), businesses can probably get away with requiring ODF.
None of them will run on my Wii anyway.
If you were planning on upgrading your PC hardware at the same time, you can jump ship rawther cheaply now: $600 for a low-end Mac now, or $600 for a Linux/gaming box in March (once Sony gets its supply chain straightened out), and both can be used set-top.
Microsoft shows the trend of increasingly limit, restrict, annoy their customers, in favor of other companies (DRM) or Microsoft itself, while being in trouble already to convince the same customers, that they need newer versions of software they use.
Sooner or later Microsoft will hit the magic threshold what Fox network just experienced in it's quest for profit with the OJ Simpson fiasco.
This is the best news I've heard for Desktop Linux. Now if we can just convince the Linux community that a dumbed down/standardized version is a good and worthwhile distribution to develop (for my grandmother).
Yes, Vista WGA sucks. XP's 2001 WPA was bad, but tolerably bad. WGA is horrible, and fails technologically for the same reason DRM fails - smart kids like breaking down barriers that restrict them. And no matter how much money Microsoft has, and there are always more minds not working for Microsoft (or RIAA/MPAA/etc) than are.
(A less cynical version of me would also say "...and there are many smart minds that cannot be bought.")
Microsoft is slipping the keys to our "Personal" Computers right out of our pockets and we're letting them do it. Vista computers should simply be referred to MC's as that is what they will be as they hold the keys over your head. I'm not liking the direction this is heading in and the lack of notice on the part of the general population.
If you store critical files on your system partition (on any OS) then you get what you deserve.
Always store critical files on a non-system partition or drive in a file system that multiple OSs can read and your data will always be accessible. It is also prudent to back up such files to a network file server and removable media as well (tape, CD, DVD, flash, etc...).
This is not a concern. I call FUD. (though I hate that acronym with a passion)
"The terms of the Vista EULA, like the current EULA related to the 'Windows Genuine Advantage,' allows Microsoft to unilaterally decide that you have breached the terms of the agreement, and they can essentially disable the software, and possibly deny you access to critical files on your computer without benefit of proof, hearing, testimony or judicial intervention. In fact, if Microsoft is wrong, and your software is, in fact, properly licensed, you probably will be forced to buy a license to another copy of the operating system from Microsoft just to be able to get access to your files, and then you can sue Microsoft for the original license fee."
It's possible that Bill Gates is paying people to read email too. You will probably wait a long time for the money however.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
First, you rarely if ever buy software. You license software.
Second, MS is screwing up. I probably like MS more than 90% of the people here.
Piracy is helping MS not hurting it. If they stomp out piracy they
are going to stomp out some of their user base.
Losing that user base will hurt them badly in the future.
That's why I use devils0wn Genuine Advantage for Windows.
FCKGW-etc...
What is "malware"? Software that contacts servers without the user's knowledge and transmits information? Software that disables temporarily or permanently the use of certain features or abilities? Software that restricts or limits your access of resources? Software that runs without your agreement and against your intentions, and that crashes your computer should you disable it?
I doubt this will get past the MS lobbyist.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Good point - when do XP CD-ROMs become coasters due to MS discontinuing the XP activation process and decommissioning the servers?
This needs to be expressed as a TV commercial. An entire business shut down because something went wrong with Vista licensing, with people on the phone to Microsoft support. Listening to music on hold.
Or some guy in a strange city with a laptop that won't work, unable to get help. He calls Microsoft and gets the "visit us on the web at www.microsoft.com" pitch, and he's frantically getting coins from a cafe owner to feed into a pay phone while on hold.
Remember that lovely thing called DRM? Where data is tied to the machine it's supposed to be viewed on?
Now, the OS is part of such a machine...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
...you probably will be forced to buy a license to another copy of the operating system from Microsoft just to be able to get access to your files, and then you can sue Microsoft for the original license fee.
That just ain't never gonna happen! No individual, and very few very large companies, can afford to get Microsoft to court, let alone win against them!
The only hope would be that enough people get hosed, then get pissed off enough, that a class-action suit gets filed. Even then the only winners will be a lot of fat-cat rich lawyers. Microsoft knows this, Microsoft counts on this and Microsoft has structured their business plan around it.
"What do you want to lose today?"
What amazes me is that people are continually surprised by the things Microsoft does. What amazes me even more is that people still give them money. The only way you get a business to start changing their ways is to stop giving them your money. There are too many alternatives (free and commercial) for people to continue bending over for Microsoft.
All this arguing over a hypothetical situation? Microsoft has had the ability to disable your software for a long time. So far all they have ever done is keep you from getting updates.. FCKGW serial number anyone? In just about every EULA you read they spew out all kinds of decativation crap at you. This is nothing new to anything. If your pissed stay on your linux distro or XP. I am. If your ok with EULA then spend the $$ and go buy it. I just dont get what all the fuss is about. Its not like Sony who put a bunch of crap on your computer without telling you. It says right on their site what the agreement is. Accept it or dont. Your OS of choice is becoming like a religion. You are never going to convince anyone to convert just as they will never convince you. Therefor all points are moot... Just as this one is.
MISSING - Sig file. 2 years old black and white and very funny. If found please email me.
Intresting article. This passage caught my eye:
Remember, all the cases from the 80's and 90's involved sophisticated parties (on both sides) who negotiated individual license agreements - not mass market software.
IIRC, the early cases upholding the general validity of mass market "shrink wrap" licenses rested in part on the court's finding that the consumers knew essentially what they were getting--the licenses were common enough, and terms standard enough, that the consumer could reasonably be assumed to be aware of them before they made the purchase. (Remember that in the paper world, you can't impose a contract *after* money changes hands.)
All the cases the article mentioned are, apparently, more traditional contracts, which were signed before the purchase, not after.
It seems to me that if the EULA terms get this innovative or repressive (depending on your POV) they may not be upheld at all, since the consumer can't be expected to know what's going on anymore.
But I haven't followed the precedents in any detail.
DRM is exactly the same.. but they never complain the same way about DRM..
Seems like a double standard to me..
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
By reading this t-shirt you agree to buy the wearer a beer.
You go over your online activation limit, your OS is limited (nag window). You call in to Microsoft support line, get a reactivation key, rinse and repeat.
Worried about all that activation crap? Unplug your Windows box from the net! I did, and you can too.
Here's whatcha do.
Doesn't really work for online gaming yet, but it will just as soon as the guys at VMWare fully support DX9.
Enjoy!
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
>Microsoft can not remove your access to the files unless they're doing on the fly encryption. They also have no reason to do that.
Imagine someone running BitLocker. Imagine that for some reason that person's copy of Vista got flagged as unauthorized, and dropped into a mode with reduced functionality.
That reduced functionality had bloody well better include file system access, because otherwise not even booting from a live CD will recover the data.
(Be serious. Nobody in real life has backups).
"the substance of the transaction at issue here is a sale and not a license" -- Judge Pregerson
Use Linux.
Could there possibly every be a legal way to crack the installer such that someone did not have to accept the EULA? That would certainly create an interesting situation!
Another interesting scenario would be to boot up a brand new PC with a live CD and modify whatever program requires the user to accept the EULA (so that acceptance is not required). Since you never accepted the EULA, there would be no ban on your re-engineering the code (and some legal domains don't allow bans on re-engineering anyway).
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Okay, this is kind of a rant in reverse, but listen:
I run Debian stable on my server at home, and testing on my home and work computers. I can get my corporate email, open microsoft docs, do graphic prep work, and everything else I could do on my Windows box -- and run ssh-agent, authentication keys and a proxy so that I can do work things from home without delays, hiccups or nonsense. The only two things it's not good at out of the box -- Quicken and games -- are available if I feel like paying for the software to support it. I can do everything I need to do, and far more than I can with Windows (which is why I'm running it at work) -- and I can backup to an external drive with rsync. Oh, and I can use flash and watch AVI movies, and install the microsoft core fonts if I want.
There's just no reason to run microsoft machines any more, unless you're ignorant, or buy a system with no OS installed -- and even the debian installer is terrific these days.
(okay, end reverse rant.)
These sort of terms are illegal in the UK. Under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 they would be judged unfair and consequently voided.
Than this for years. The problem with licensing software is that eventually the customer will under the license they areee to have no rights at all. Most online games already have the right to take your money and give you nothing in return. Many online games already do that "take your money and good-bye" on a whim. See the latest rounds of bannings from World of Warcraft as an example. I'm sure some of those people were innocent and had just forked over $175 for a six month subscription. "No refunds and no software because we can." - the future of software licensing.
Thanks to eating disorders most chicks are reasonably good looking these days.
I guess Microsoft has now solved the issue of how to deal with users that don't want to upgrade their software. Windows Vista "calls home" every few months to re-validate itself. If the process fails then vista disables an unspecified set of features. So if we look a few years down the road to when they want us to upgrade to a new OS, all Microsoft has to do is turn off their Vista validation servers and presto! Everyone is properly motivated to upgrade. Yippie.
microsoft is glutton for punishment. they first throttle every other company in this world, and dont let any other OS to compete.
there ought to be different pricing points for different people. there are people who want the the OS for less, but NO, microsoft decides to kill all the other operating systems with brute force, or for that matter any software that threatens their monopoly. so the people who don't have the money to pay their software simply go for piracy(say most of the 3rd world countries).
now, microsoft with all their money can really donate software free of cost to these people instead of fleecing these people first and then act magnanimous (like bill gates does right now, does his charity). on the other hand they are really torturing the rest of the paying public with all these activation schemes, and put up with all kinds of hardship. these guys should be sent to the corporate gallows. each time they have wasted our time with their shoddy software right through the ages, they have killed us by a wee bit, just a jab each time!!!
Given that Vista now "calls home" every few months to re-validate itself, I guess that rules out using Vista in any type of secure environment where Internet access is not allowed.
I have not booted a Windows machine since May of 2002. That was the month I said to hell with Microsoft and switched to Linux. I also decided that I would actively encourage others to make the switch. "Actively" means to me that not only do I install Linux for people, but I support it for them as well. The support has not been a burden. They don't get viruses, adware, or other junk, which is where most of my friends that use Windows need the most help. The Linux folk are just able to use their machines without fuss, which is all they want.
I would add that there should be a pox on Novell for their recent dancing with Microsoft. All it does is further Microsoft's cause and hasten the doom of Novell who is (or was) a real competitor to Microsoft in the business arena. Novell's GroupWise, eDirectory, print server, etc. are marvelous products that Microsoft does not come close to; Novell must be in very bad straits indeed to do what they are doing with Microsoft.
As much as I dislike the activation and can't stand MS, there's no way in the world MS is going to allow customers to not be able to activate a legit product. I've used a single copy of XP since it was released. I've installed it over and over again, maybe 15 times, and have had to call MS to activate it many times. Each time, I told them it was a new install and the previous machine would no longer be running it (as was often the case as they generally became linux machines).
Anti-Microsoft feelings can obscure the real problem--the type of technological abuse.
Microsoft is not the only problem
See updated news items!
DRM is exactly the same.. but they never complain the same way about DRM..
:)
Seems like a double standard to me..
False. It's Microsoft in this case, so I'm off the hook--consistent positions are not my concern.
I'm running a pirated version of XP at home, but I really don't see anything all that compelling in Vista to make me go burn it off the usual sites. Microsoft has made this OS such a pain in the ass, plus the perceived benefits just aren't there. This may cut down on the non-MS versions of Vista, but neither does it make me want to run out and buy it instead (at $399?). I'd rather go build my own box at that price, and run 2000 or Linux on it.
Exactly. I manage ~50 specialty stand-alone PC's spread out across several US military bases. None of them are ever going to be connected to the internet. Consequently, none of them are ever going to run Vista.
Re: " ...and then you can sue Microsoft for the original license fee."
Oh, I assure you that it'll be for MUCH more than for for the original licence fee.
Heard any good sigs lately?
When windows XP came out people were all saying that Microsoft could spy on whatever you download and shut down your computer at any time or call the cops on you if you did anything naughty. Overall though I think this is more widespread hysteria on the part of the people who get hysterical about this sort of thing.
I'm not some new fangled business educated type person but I would imagine the business strategy of 'disenfranchising' users based on heresay or whatever other means Microsoft could potentially use would be bad for business.
Imagine for whatever reason an entire animation studio running vista and all the computer get shut down and locked up cause Vista decided they were being bad. If the studio recovers from that disaster it's likely they'll switch over to Linux. Same goes for any other business.
Microsoft is going to go Neo-Hoober on everybody just cause the feature exists.
This may sound off beat, but for the sake of argument, wouldn't their actions inside my computer be considered "Breaking and Entering"? If they owned a doorknob company, they would have no right to break into my house to confirm a receipt to the doorknob that I installed. Yes, anyone can walk by the outside of the door and notice the vista brand on the doorknob, much like web pages resolve browser types when users connect to a site. So when the MS team break into your house and fails to find that your receipts are in the attic, even though you've paid, expect them to change your locks, leave no new key, and cheese it! I'm boycotting Vista.
I hope Vista will be delivered with an included Knoppix CD to make sure you can access your files after Vista has been deactivated by MS because you bought a new mousemat!
-- Cheers!
Please!
Free Clue!!
DO NOT fall for the FUD M$ is attempting to spread regarding linux, it's the exact same as last time a company sued Linux, but this time without a proxy so (they hope we think) we have more to be afraid of.
I would advise you to use SuSE but I'm sure that M$ has plans to somehow screw Novell AND the userbase.
Seriously,
Considering that *nix pre-dates M$'s entire business It's FAR more likely (& if I'm not mistaken has even been PROVEN) that M$ has rather large chunks of open source code in it's OS.
In particular the IP stack if I remember correctly is 80 to 90% open source licensed.
Why the OSS community is not taking up this matter I do not understand.
This makes for a tasty target if one could develop a virus that spreads fast and deactivates a WHOLE bunch of machines in a short period of time. If it was done right, it would land with a bang and cripple Microsoft's reputation.
It probably won't happen because the bot owners really don't want dead machines but if it did, it might just make a large enough mess of it all to get some attention on the issue.
When you go to buy a computer, you don't really have a choice. Everything will come with Vista installed.
A few weeks back I bought a new computer with Linux preinstalled from a brick and mortor store. I only got it because I've been waiting for Apple to release the Core 2 MacBook Pro and my PC is dying.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I said no text
Don't the consumer protection laws come before any EULA you might agree? As in if the EULA forbids something that is provided by the laws of a country and the user does have every legal right to use bought software (not having shared license key or whatever) won't the EULA then be rendered void?
At very least the customer should be able to get their money back, and then buy another license or save few hundred bucks and go with some other operating system.
Are there any consumer protection laws in USA btw? I have hard time believing that this could be a problem in Scandinavian countries.
Please correct me if I am wrong :)
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.
Squirrel!
There are variants of boycotts. I wonder if you mean the temporary kind as in "if you repent, we'll come back".
I'm pretty sure there's a swath of disaffected users who won't come back. We just have to solve some short term problems. I've seen a lot of discussion about Vendor LockIn. The MBA types writing case studies of Apple would call that "adding value through unity". I can't help thinking of Animal Farm.
When I start my Linux Adventure, I'll keep track of the hours spent. I feel my situation is textbook: I'm clever, but no expert.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Microsoft has broken the law before, and been found guilty. Nothing substantial happened.
Hell, the clit, er Clinton, admin had MS down for the count but the new Bush admin not only let them up a to walk away they didn't even slap MS on the wrist. This admin cares more for big business than for the people.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I'm glad I don't need Microsoft anymore - they really are a big waste of time and money.
You mean somebody actually read one of those eulos?
I thought the idea was to find the "i accept" or "next" button as fast as possible..
If you do not read the thing you would not have all these problems!
Kill your TV
So why get Vista in the first place if hardly any rights are left for the user? I think more and more people will think like this. This OS together with this company are not working for you but rather against you.
.... when things like this happen.
There are better alternatives available. More people will see it
- Martin
Because of the one true difference between most open source projects and Windows. It isn't bugs, or features, or open standards, or any of that.
Windows has a marketing department they have to take orders from.
No programmer in his right mind would ever have suggested Genuine Advantage. Flawed right from the gate, that idea is. And I can prove marketing is responsible for it. It's all right there in the name. "Genuine Advantage". It doesn't describe what it does at all. It hides it and even tells a little white lie. Having this thing on your system is no advantage at all - to you, anyways.
Yup. Marketing people. And the guy who wrote the thing probably ended the argument by throwing up his hands and saying "Fine. I'll just write the damn thing. Nobody listens to me anyways. But don't come crying to me when this thing tanks."
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
How about if someone pulls a blue bunny & blackholes MS at their Peering Point?
Everyone's MS goes down when validation comes due - figure 3-4% on any given day?
Russia and EU governments have already expressed concerns over these kinds of issues, not to mention that if the capability is in Vista, then MS can be forced to implement it at the whim of the US government - add some geolocation code to the Vista server & everyone in France is a pirate.
"That word, I don't think it means what you think it means."
End User LICENSE Agreement. You license the use of the O.S. with Microsoft. There is no sale, it is not yours.
I think the term "Purchased" is being incorrectly associated with the trading of money for the right to use software. No one really purchases a copy of Windows.
$ whatis msft msft: nothing appropriate
And the more I use a computer for work, the less I want to use one outside of work. Hiking, hunting, biking, motorcycling, reading, hanging out with friends (sometimes playing non-computer games), building stuff, drawing, etc, are all more fun than sitting in front of a glass teat of any type.
I prefer physical interaction with people and nature myself. However along with hiking and other outdoor activities I also love photography, and though I haven't got a DSLR body yet to go along with my film SLR when I do I'll want to be able to upload my photos while I'm out hiking.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Hey, you guys who are all up in arms about Vista...
How many of you have installed Windows XP?
One reason I'm still using Windows 2000 is because Windows XP already gave Microsoft too much say in what I could do with my computer. If you accepted Windows XP, why draw the line at Windows Vista?
So you'll be forgotten and ignored soon enough. No one cares.
The *only* way MS will change their ways is if they see a hit to "the bottom line". Unfortunatly I fear that, just as with Wal*Mart
Heck, Walmart now sales PCs with Linux preinstalled now.
Right now Linux and MacOS are not options for much of the computer-owning/using population. Why? Games. Virtually none of the games most commonly played right now function in *either* platform.
I know I don't, and I know of noone else who buys and plays games much. Many of those who are game players have playstations or another game console, and those who have computers use them to get things done, check email, and surf the net. At the same tyme you're saying Macs don't have games I hear others say they wouldn't get a Mac because all they are good for is playing plays.
if Apple finally got their head out of their ass and offered their OS to the x86 using population
Apple isn't a software company, or a hardware company. Apple IS a Systems Company with both hardware and software that just work together. Apple has previously licensed Mac OS to clone makers but found out that the clone makers were draining Apple's sales. They lost more in declining hardware sales than they made in licensing Mac OS. So when they brought him back, Steve Jobs stopped the bleeding by stopping licensing Mac OS. However even if Apple were to make it work there's one big problem with licensing OSX, the 800lb gorilla that is Microsoft. Apple would be entering into direct competition with MS, and we all know how MS deals with competitors, Balmer throws his chairs around screaming he'll kill them.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Why M$ doesn`t change his to this simple one:
"Your PC and everything in it, is belong to us."
Simple and very clear
It's an issue that should be worked out by lawyers and law-makers,
EULAs are created by lawyers, you want to get rid of them. As for "law-makers", if this means congress the only authority the feds have is in the interstate commerce clause. If it means state legislatures, then yes let states handle it.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I don't think many people will use Microsoft Vista. The average user has become a lot smarter which means Microsoft's dream of a wide adoption of Vista has become utterly unrealistic. It seems almost that the more Microsoft hypes the more Linux gains. Now even in the corporate world as well as at home.
I run Linux :)
Do you really see no difference in the two scenerios? In the OSX scenerio, you are moving an OS to a machine apple never promised it would work on (non apple hardware).
In the WGA/Vista Validation scenerio a machine that was designed to run the OS and the OS that was meant to run on the machine, suddenly no longer work. This could in fact even happen with the machine you bought the Vista with. Microsoft just simply says "die" and the OS obediently dies, leaving you holding your propritary data encrypted (might as well be) by Microsoft...
Do you remember the Virus that worked that way a few months ago? you catch the virus, it encrypts you hard drive, and you have to pay the virus writer for the key.
1) Sell a nice os
2) Get everyone to use it
3) randomly pull out the rug (from legitimate owners)
4) PROFIT!!!
OhOh better post anonymously, I just revealed Microsoft's new top secret business plan.
What'd be worse is if a virus decided to deliberately or accidentally trip their protections...
As for the people saying "don't upgrade!" you'd best turn off Automatic Updates and manage them manually. There are plenty of anti-customer bits of software coming out for XP already, let alone Vista.
Regarding the submitter:
Software "ownership" is pretty much always "licensed used" in reality. As such, your usage is subject to either the terms of the vendor's license *or* copyright law.
There never seems to be any confusion when this is applied to GPLed (or other OSS licensed) software. Why is commercial software any different ?
You ring them up and get it reactivated. If they won't and you really *do* have a legitimate copy, you take the issue to a small claims court or sue them. Same thing you do whenever any other company doesn't deliver a service or product you have paid for.
Regarding TFA:
For some reason the author talks about contracts. EULAs are not contracts (or not binding ones, anyway).
The author talks about only "licensing" rather than "owning" Vista as if that is something unique, when pretty much _all_ "Intellectual Property" everyone "buys" is subject to exactly the same conditions. Just because you own a Vista DVD, doesn't mean you own Vista - just like just because you own a Finding Nemo DVD, doesn't mean you own Finding Nemo.
The author may well have an issue with "Intellectual Property" - personally I could easily relate to such a view - but using it as a thinly veiled excuse to Microsoft-bash is disingenuous to the point of deliberate deception.
Outside of the Microsoft-hating paranoia rife throughout Slashdot and well-represented in TFA, the reality of the situation is pretty simple:
* If you have a legitimate copy of Vista, you'll be fine. There's a slim chance you might suffer a minor inconvenience and have to bfiefly use a telephone to activate your version of Vista, but if it's legal, you'll be fine.
* Microsoft aren't going to engage in mass deactivations of legitimately licensed copies of Vista.
* Microsoft aren't going to shut down your copy of Vista just because you happen to read Slashdot or have a Linux partition.
* Microsoft aren't going to remotely lock you out of your data.
* Microsoft aren't going to remotely erase your hard disk.
There are going to be false positives when legitimate copies of Vista are shut down. No system is perfect. I fully expect the first time this happens a standard anti-Microsoft headline is going to hit Slashdot about how Microsoft destroyed someone's life because they had to spend five minutes on hold reactivating their OS when they could have been playing games. The regular Chicken Littles will be running around screaming "forced upgrade" like usually they do, and 99% of people won't care, because the actualy outcome (in EULA-esque small-print at the end of the article) will be that the person had Vista up and running again five minutes later.
Only if Microsoft don't reactivate a proven legitimate copy, however, is it actually going to be newsworthy. *Then* the paranoid Slashdotters might have a leg to stand on. I'm not going to hold my breath for that eventuality, however.
One day someone will be bored, and create a script that takes advantage of Microsoft's Windows Genuine Advantage. This savvy little teen will let loose a virus thats exploits the Windows Genuine Advantage, and the security on the OS. It will install on many computers, and even though Microsoft said Vista was secure, everyone finds out it isn't that secure. Meanwhile computers are shutting down everywhere, and the people cry fowl. Microsoft says "sue me!" the public does, they win because several vulnerabilities have already been discovered on the Vista. Therefore Microsoft can't claim the Windows Genuine Advantage is fool proof. Their Eula is void. The people get their money back, and then some. Or a new OS key...
Second dreamPeople cry fowl, and take Microsoft to court in a class action because everyone knows you can't guarantee nothing 100% secure on a computer, and Microsoft's Eula goes way beyond business laws, and considers all users guilty regardless if they have proof, plus it also puts undo stress for businesses, and consumers of the Operating system, and creates a user that is auto guilty of a crime without consideration . The laws of the land state you are innocent until proven guilty. Microsoft bypassed this and went for the throat. Microsoft's Eula is taken to Court because their rules for using their OS creates a defamation of character, defies the laws of the land, and creates loss of millions of dollars from users, and businesses. You are guilty regardless, you will loose your data. Microsoft doesn't care if you have a key, and jewel disk. The people win in court. Microsoft's EULA is considered not forcible. It is voided by the courts. They have to issue keys, and compensation for downtime for businesses.
on a personal note...
they may loose business wise, if a business spends thousands of dollars for the right to use it, and they are shut down, there is no way they will just buy a new key. I see many actually loosing data due to the Windows Genuine Advantage shutting down computers, and a glitch just happens to be there also. It can happen. Let this happen to some major businesses, and someone will cry fowl. Microsoft will pay. Unless business versions has a nicer EULA than the consumer version. If that is the case many consumers who loose will get their own States involved in a class action suit. I wonder if our lawmakers are seeing this? According to Microsoft they are the law, Judge, and Jury. Does this settle well with our lawmakers?
The open source revolution is happening. Microsoft is worried, as they should be. What would happen if everyone started running a freeware os like Linux and using free office suites like OpenOffice.org? Micro$oft would be left out in the cold. This is their answer to the sudden emphasis on Open Source. Granted, it's not a very good one, and it will turn off more people like me than it would keep. Who would want to run an operating system that basically owns your data? That's the key - that's how M$ is going to try to keep everyone on Windows. It's just like a car. When you have to buy an expensive part for your car, you usually figure it's worth it, because it's cheaper than getting a new car. Well, it's the same with this. If you have to go buy another expensive license to access your data, you figure you might as well just stick with Windows because it's easier to use than Linux or Mac OS (since it's the only thing you know how to use) and then there's compatibility to think about. People want to make sure they can do their work on their home computer and bring it in to work. That's how Micro$oft will keep customers.
How will M$ get away with this legally? Easy. How many computers owned by the government run Windows? What would happen if Microsoft disappeared? All those pretty little computers won't get anymore security patches, terrorists will hack into them, etc etc. Something bad would happen. Hey, when about 98% of all computer in the world run Windows, you can't expect Microsoft to disappear because they won't let several million people access their data without paying for the os twice, can you?
By the way, I'm proud to be living during the Open Source Revolution. We ought to start a Crusade against Sir Bill of Gates in the Silicon Valley...
Getting worried about some crippled features in Microsoft's EULA. Seriously people, what else is new? No matter how they try, some one will crack it.
Or just tell them you use Suse!
This marvel of modern technology can only be programmed via the web, so in order to use it, you have to set up an account.
Creating an account requires you to accept Logitech's "Terms of Use". If you don't agree, you cannot create an account. Congratulations: you got an expensive Harmony paperweight.
The "Terms of Use" include the following Gems:
Translation: you are at our mercy.
Translation: Better be nice to us, or you'll have a paperweight on your hands.
Translation: We can change the contract terms without telling you and if you accessed the site without checking first, tough luck.
When you buy the remote, you are not told that your ability to use it may be restricted or that you are required to agree to a license in order to use it. You only discover it AFTER YOU PAY.
Smooth.
Real Smooth.
I only just learned about force-quit last night while trying to load HP printer drivers on Mac OS X 10.4.8. I have been very happy with my Mac and I have always been very happy with my HP printers, but last night I lost a lot of confidence. I was trying to install the drivers for my Photosmart C4180 printer on Tiger. The installer kept erroring out and not quiting gracefully. I tried both the CD copy and the downloaded copies of the driver. HP support said they have never heard of this trouble before. I always hate it when they say that because I don't believe I am the only persone on earth with a Mac and an HP printer. I asked the HP support person what the OS level was on their Macs and he said 10.4.6. Well 10.4.8 is the current version and HP's support depeartment is two versions behind. Considering it's HP, I would of expected them two have at least one machine on every known version of Mac OS X. But no, after making me try the install six times, they told me to call Apple and get help from them. Ah, its the old multi-vendor finger pointing exercise. How I hate that. Anyway, the moral lof the story is HP doesn't bother to keep up with Apple software releases any more. I guess I am lucky I never had to learn about force-quit before now.
Would this work?
1) Go to a PC store,
2) Say you are considering buying a PC,
3) They show a PC with whatever MS Windows,
4) You say, YUK I don't want to use MS Windows, don't you have a Linux PC?
5) They say What?/We don't
6) You walk out
Repeat at every possible PS Store that sells mostly MS Windows PCs.
The article is exaggerating _a little_. You can still boot off of CD and get access to your files.
I've always wondered about those people who buy brand new PC's from a shop with windows preinstalled on the system. They aren't presented with the EULA upon purchase and therefore do not agree with it, but use the operating system regardless.
//MickJT//
Lets say 3 years down the track, after the warranty period is finished, they find they need to use their recovery disc or windows oem disc, and discover the EULA. Was the sale even legitimate in the first place? Can they get their money back even though it's 3 years later & the warranty expired?
Or.. What if this person decided to use Norton Ghost to ghost his or her machine immediately after purchase, and simply restored the image when something went wrong, thus NEVER ever agreeing or seeing the EULA. Could this person then reverse engineer parts of the operating system and other things that are a breach of the EULA, on the technicality that the EULA was never presented to him/her? Is it his/her responsibility to check for an EULA?
Can you be in breach of a license agreement if you never saw it? What if you find a way around the "I agree" button, but the EULA never states that you need to agree to it? For example, you discover the EULA, read it, then use Norton Ghost's restore image as a way around ticking "I Agree", but the EULA doesn't state you must agree to it. Much like the "You must be 18 to enter this site", what if you stumble across the adult website when you're 6 yrs old and have no concept of the law, or aren't of a legal age to accept terms & conditions of entering such a site. Isn't clicking "I am 18" only useful for people who ARE 18 & if under you can't be held responsible?
Perhaps a lawyer could answer ALL of these questions i'm dying to know the answer to.
i knoe priecy of windows is pretty big but relly disabling windows on people will only make them not use it. i suggest linux to people all the time anymore for the reasion of its alot beter then windows in the terms of not being so open to vireses spywhere etc and is rock solid stable. i havw both instaled on my system and if it ever said sorry windows is disabled we hate you i would simply just remove windows off my pc and just run linux all the time. i had a total windows noob switch to linux it took him abought a week to figure out ubuntu and now he loves it he whont ever go back.
I see here the new challenge for virus writter. If I were one, this is definitively a target I would be aiming :)
:)
I am glad to still run Linux
Yes, they are. However, I would argue that having WoW not-work is a bit less problematic than having my OS go bye-bye.
Also, they are seldom deactivating your account except for two reasons : a) not paying the agreed-upon monthly amount (yes, it can be changed whenever, but...) and b) causing problems for other people.
I, unfortunately, doubt that Vista boxes which get pwned by virii/trojans and start spamming/DDOSing will get turned off by M$ - even though this is a major point that they should be using:
"If your computer becomes a hazard to your own data or others on the Internet, Microsoft will proactively help you to fix the problem!"
Someone in the UK with time on their hands looking for a cause should contact the Office of Fair Trading since it sounds like the contract between MS and the individual is too one-sided and the OFT has a legal requirement to look into any complaint made. I understand that they work under rules that are common in most EU countries now, so maybe it would be worth doing there too.
And do you really think that "interstate commerce" can't be used to justify regulation of EULAs? The whole "interstate commerce" thing has become a technicality to spread federal control over all sorts of things. Anyway, it doesn't matter if it's handled on the state level or federal level. Either way, we should do away with EULAs.
The congress would try to use the interstate commerce clause but it would be inappropiate use I think. I believe what you say about the use of the clause being used a technicality for federal control is all too true, as witnessed by the the USSC's decision in the California medical marijuana case a few years back. The Justices used the clause as a basis for denying California's decision to allow medical marijuana yet they basically said it wasn't about interstate commerce. As for EULAs while I prefer free as in free speach not free beer, if anything EULAs shoud be clearly written and accessible without having to open packaging, so people will can know what is included before they buy as well as have less restrictive terms.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries: Mark Rasch looks at the license agreement for Windows Vista and how its product activation component, which can disable operation of the computer, may be like walking on thin ice.
you had me at #!
So I really do not think the author has fully understood what happens at the end of the 30 day grace period. And as usual the majority of the anti-ms types of slashdot have blindly agreed with any anti-MS sentiments voiced rather than spend time researching the truth; it is out there. At the end of the grace activation period (30 days) Windows Vista goes into 'reduced' functionality mode. Microsoft do not encrypt data, they do not delete data, they do not prevent you from getting to that data to off load it. What happens is that Windows Vista runs the default browser (yes even if its Firefox it runs it) that will allow you to connect to the activation site via the web, or any other web site if it comes to that, or present instructions on how to activate via the telephone. After one hour the logged on user is logged off. The user can immediately log back on. Users are presented with reminders about activation as the grace period expires, with increasing frequency, until they activate or elect to not. The purpose of Activation is not to be able to deny you access to data but to deny people who pirate closed source software a revenue stream. Have a look at the following two URLs for more detail. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/windowsvista/plan /faq.mspx#EYPAC
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?com mand=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9004970