Slashdot Mirror


Taiwan Group Responsible For 90% of MSFT Piracy

Stony Stevenson writes "Microsoft claims that a small group led by a recently jailed Taiwanese man was the source of almost all high-quality pirated copies of its software up until his arrest in 2004. The claim suggests that Microsoft practically wiped out commercial piracy of its products with the arrest of Huang Jer-sheng, the owner of Taiwan-based software distributor Maximus Technology. Microsoft announced today that Huang and his associates. who were all recently sentenced to jail time, had been responsible for the 'production and distribution of more than 90 percent of the high-quality counterfeit Microsoft software products either seized by law enforcement or test-purchased around the world.'"

35 of 229 comments (clear)

  1. High quality? by Electrode · · Score: 5, Funny

    I didn't think there was such a thing as high-quality Microsoft software, pirated or otherwise...

    1. Re:High quality? by arivanov · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Compared to a stripped and vandalised "recovery disk" it is high quality. You could actually install from it.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    2. Re:high quality? by osu-neko · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ah yes, Hobson's Choice...

      If the theater only has one movie, it's true that you have a choice of watching it or not, but it's not true that you have a choice of movies to watch.

      I think the OP was complaining about the lack of choices for software to buy, not about the ability to choose to refrain from buying computers. Assuming you've decided to give up on the old abacus and join the 21st century, if you walk into most stores, yes, you are forced to buy Microsoft products. You only "choice" here is Hobson's Choice.

      Although this is true of most stores, it's getting better. I'm seeing "Apple Stores" springing up inside more and more these days. Still not a lot of choice but better than none.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    3. Re:High quality? by Torodung · · Score: 5, Insightful

      LOL.

      Slashdot needs a +1 "obligatory" modifier, so these sorts of jokes can be tagged as "obligatory" instead of "funny." ;^)

      --
      Toro

    4. Re:high quality? by Drinking+Bleach · · Score: 3, Informative

      I can still buy hardware without being tied to any software, I don't know where you shop...

      While it may seem grim with the lack of software choices at stores, are you aware there's plenty of quality operating systems available for free (legally)? Operating systems such as Ubuntu, OpenBSD, Solaris, just to name a few.

    5. Re:High quality? by flyingsquid · · Score: 5, Funny
      I didn't think there was such a thing as high-quality Microsoft software, pirated or otherwise...

      Obviously, he modified the software extensively before selling it. The fact that it was high-quality is, of course, what tipped people off that it wasn't an authentic Microsoft product.

    6. Re:high quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      You don't like dogs much, do you?

    7. Re:High quality? by just+fiddling+around · · Score: 4, Informative

      You are making the assumption that the recovery disk contains all that. In fact, most of the recovery content is on your hard disk. Now, if you try to repair your PC after the original HDD fails what happens? You have a nice shiny disc, a legitimate paper "licence" to Windows and no way to install it back.

      Surprise!

      THAT is what makes "recovery disks" crap, even more than the bloatware and crapware.

      --
      You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
    8. Re:High quality? by jimicus · · Score: 4, Insightful
      While 90% of end users will probably benefit from a simplified recovery process, it's a pain for the other 10% for a number of reasons:

      1. The recovery disk can't be used to boot the PC into a recovery mode to try and rescue any data.
      2. The recovery disk will almost certainly blow away anything else that's on the system - potentially including other partitions containing other OS installations. Whereas a straight Windows install can be instructed not to do this. Pretty vital if you need to restore data.
      3. If the OEM provides a recovery disk, chances are the only way to get hold of a genuine, plain Windows install CD which eliminates the first two problems is to go out and buy a retail copy of Windows. Which is pretty galling when you look at the invoice for the PC and see that you've already bought Windows, you should have no need to buy it again.
      4. If you get this far and decide to buy a retail copy of Windows - ok, you've accepted that, so be it. But - ah - the PC is two or three years old and can't possibly run Vista.
      5. The bloatware on the recovery disk can make supporting PCs harder. Case in point: most wireless network cards have software which replaces the Windows user interface for wireless networking. Which means that now you can't easily talk your friend through setting up wireless networking over the phone because you have no idea what they can see.
      6. The bloatware provides a false sense of security - "I don't need AV because I've got Symantec that came with my PC" (but I didn't read the small print and it hasn't updated in 11 months).
      7. Even when the addon software is justifiable, it is frequently of pretty appalling quality. (HP, I'm looking at you and the backup application you ship with new PCs. Specifically, the application which takes backups perfectly happily but you can't easily restore from them. It's just as well I tested that before I handed the PC over to my mother).
    9. Re:High quality? by couchslug · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Compared to either, a live Linux CD wins.

      I can rescue, troubleshoot, surf with, and easily install from a variety of live Linux CDs.

      The tools are there to build something similar:

      http://www.911cd.net/forums/

      using Windows PE exist, but MSFT doesn't bother. Too bad, really. It would make user lives easier.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    10. Re:High quality? by mikael · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Say you have a dual boot hard disk drive, that has three or more partitions on it (Windows partition, a couple of Linux partitions for kernels, user home directories, Swap space etc....). For whatever reason, you need to reinstall the Windows partition. As far as the recovery disk is concerned, the whole hard disk drive belongs to Windows and no-one else. So you can either delete the partition altogether or leave it as it is until Judgement day.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  2. High quality? by DuncanE · · Score: 5, Funny

    Come on... using "High quality" and "Microsoft products" in the same sentence?

    So they were responsible for 9 out the 10 pirate copies of Microsoft Flight simulator then? ;-)

  3. high quality? by boguslinks · · Score: 5, Funny

    had been responsible for the 'production and distribution of more than 90 percent of the high-quality counterfeit Microsoft software products

    Why doesn't MSFT sell these "high-quality" products instead of the crap they've been selling us for years.

  4. quantifying the unquantifable! by timmarhy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Does anyone really believe they have any clue how much of their software gets pirated?

    90% sounds like a nice marketing department developed figure.

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    1. Re:quantifying the unquantifable! by darkonc · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Methinks that they have no problem with 'poor' people pirating their software on the sly and for free, because it keeps the monopoly alive. It's really unlikely that they're going to willingly kill 90% of that piracy market. ( If everybody who wanted an office suite or OS but couldn't (or refused to) afford MS's prices was 'forced' to go with OpenOffice and/or Linux, MS's death--grip on the market would very quickly be pried open. )
      These guys, on the other hand, seem to have been selling 'legitimate' copies of Microsoft products for real cheap -- That really does cut into Microsoft's market, which is people who are willing to pay for their products in return for either a clean conscience or to keep the MS police at bay.

      Microsoft has no problems killing those pirates.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    2. Re:quantifying the unquantifable! by treke · · Score: 5, Informative

      The quote in the summary is more specific. It's the "production and distribution of more than 90 percent of the high-quality counterfeit Microsoft software products either seized by law enforcement or test-purchased around the world."

      So they're only talking about the stuff they've confiscated and not claiming it's 90% of everything that exists.

    3. Re:quantifying the unquantifable! by kripkenstein · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The quote in the summary is more specific. It's the "production and distribution of more than 90 percent of the high-quality counterfeit Microsoft software products either seized by law enforcement or test-purchased around the world."

      So they're only talking about the stuff they've confiscated and not claiming it's 90% of everything that exists. That's pretty much it. They're talking about 'high-quality piracy', not casual piracy as in downloading from the Pirate Bay or burning your friend a copy. High quality piracy in this context means that CDs are pressed, covers forged, everything in order for the product to look like it is authentic. It is then sold as if it were in fact authentic (as opposed to casual piracy, where no money trades hands).

      It is very hard to know how much casual piracy there is. However, it is far easier to know how much high-quality piracy exists, because we are talking about actual physical products here, tangible evidence. They are also manufactured somewhere. Then, assuming that law enforcement captures such high-quality piracy in a random sampling manner (that is, all such forged products have the same chance to be caught - a working hypothesis, debatable of course), then this Taiwanese group was the source of 90% of that. So, presumably (by statistical inference) this group is responsible for 90% of high-quality piracy.

      It's a little surprising that a single group is so dominant in this area, actually, I wouldn't have expected it. However, the more interesting question is what will happen now: if suddenly 90% of these forgeries vanish off the market, what will the people buying them do? Will other suppliers fill the gap, or will the buyers turn to casual piracy, or to alternate OSes?
    4. Re:quantifying the unquantifable! by houghi · · Score: 3, Funny

      I for one am glad that they stopped the monopoly position that specific company/person had on that market share.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    5. Re:quantifying the unquantifable! by Skrynesaver · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Perhaps the title is misleading, the linked article claims that this group was responsible for 90% of counterfeit MS products. That's not piracy, it's forgery - individuals downloading and burning copies for their own use is piracy random definition according to my personal dictionary. This however was organised crime (insert "and MS isn't?" joke here) a very different proposition.

      While I loathe and detest MS and their general operating methods, (particularly the whole BSA garbage), they are entirely justified in prosecuting this crew for fraud/forgery etc... though they may get bit by the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome as they, among others, have been claiming that every kid with a torrent client is a threat to the stability of the economic system itself. </rant>

      --
      "Linux is for noobs"-The new MS fud strategy
  5. Nightline:Thieves are amoung us. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The more interesting story would be, how did they catch him?

  6. Good show, but hardly enough by Torodung · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Considering that most of the pirating Chinese world is using Sharpie scribbled CD-R's to install non-Genuine Windows, I don't think it matters terribly much if they've stopped "90%" of the flow of high-quality counterfeits.

    It's darned good that they caught the bastards, but wake me up when we stop 90% of the actual piracy in Asia.

    This strikes me as a fluff piece for nervous investors.

    --
    Toro

    1. Re:Good show, but hardly enough by king-manic · · Score: 4, Informative

      Considering that most of the pirating Chinese world is using Sharpie scribbled CD-R's to install non-Genuine Windows, I don't think it matters terribly much if they've stopped "90%" of the flow of high-quality counterfeits.

      It's darned good that they caught the bastards, but wake me up when we stop 90% of the actual piracy in Asia.

      This strikes me as a fluff piece for nervous investors. Have you been to china/taiwan/HK/S E asia in general. Some of the fakes are very convincing with packaging and so on. If you go out to a bigger local store you'll see a mix of very good fakes with legit software. They'll even translate it and hack it for use with their own servers. When i was there it was harder to find a legit copy of Warcraft 3 then a pirated one and the pirated ones where packaged decently (if nothing like the real package) and they hooked up the remnants of bnetD Asia. This isn't your geek pirating with black sharpies and spools of random software. This is the real piracy that MS ought to fight.
      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    2. Re:Good show, but hardly enough by thona · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ::It does surprise me that there is significant demand for "real looking" software,

      There is no demand.

      See, it goes like that:
      * Counterfeiter fakes software.
      * Counterfeiter and in between person pose as distributor, selling the windows copies with a SMALL discount.
      * Computer shops, always looking for a small gain (as margins are super slim) take that. Mind you, way talk about omaybe 5% less price, but if your margin is only 5% on the product, that doubles your margin.

      The shop may not know the software is fake (it was a little chaper, but it could just have been a sale), and the end user definitly does not DEMAND fake software. The whole reason it is so high quality is that the purchase chain (shop, end user) do NOT REALIZE it is fake.

      Criminal like hell. Nothing compared to copy some software where both parties know it.

    3. Re:Good show, but hardly enough by patio11 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      >>
      Criminal like hell. Nothing compared to copy some software where both parties know it.
      >>

      This appears to be the Slashdot consensus morality:

      Make a perfectly functional copy, upload it to Pirate Bay, charge for advertising: No problem.
      Make a perfectly functional copy, sell it on a CD-R, charge $1 for it: Very little problem.
      Make a perfectly functional copy, sell it on a CD which looks real, charge $100 for it: Criminal like hell.

      It would appear, on the basis of available evidence, that the Slashdot consensus doesn't give two bits about IP rights as applied to software, but thinks they are really, really important when applied to the distinctive branding on cardboard boxes. I suppose Microsoft should have invested more in Pretty Box Rights Management? It would probably make them more popular around here.

    4. Re:Good show, but hardly enough by thona · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I personally see it as vastly different. Because it affects the cunwary consumer.

      See, if I ask you to copy me software, and you do, we do something illegal, and we can discuss the moral. But we both KNOW it. It is a fact, I dont pay, we know what we get into.

      In this fact, there is the additional dimension that not only is software illegally copied, but it is done so to swindle an unsuspecting third party for money. It means that while the copy person knows it is fake, the person paying does not know so, and in fact THINKS he purchases it legally. Besides the obvious moral issue it opens that third party to legal claims, because he is comitting a crime by using this illegal copy, albeit not knowing it.

      One case where "I did not know" is a very sad defense.

      And this "betraying another unsuspecting party" does add tremendously. If I steal software, this is between me and the company putting it on the market, and the person allowing me to copy. If I make counterfeit software, I involve a third party that does not want to be in this game.

  7. Re:high-quality by cp.tar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You liars, high-quality. The quality IS THE SAME, don't blame pirates for your quality of development.

    Actually, no, it is not.

    I surmise pirates really do offer better quality, as they conveniently remove the WGA and similar "protection measures", thus ensuring the user's copy of Windows will never ever get blocked by Microsoft. For instance.

    Though I suspect that "high-quality copy" means "CD and packaging virtually indistinguishable from the original retail copy", not "a better product". Nevertheless, sometimes pirate copies are of quite higher quality than the original.

    --
    Ignore this signature. By order.
  8. Re:good/bad pirate by Icarus1919 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let's not fool ourselves. I pirate things all the time, but I've never told myself what I was doing was "good" piracy.

  9. Re: as opposed to casual piracy, where no money tr by daveb · · Score: 4, Interesting
    this is invalid.

    piracy takes money out of the hands of those who deserve it. imagine if your employer, tax office, or ex-wives, were to consider your paycheck casual and freely remove it from you and do whatever it or they pleased, including shoving it where the sun dont shine. i think you would do something, no? or are you a pussy and shrug your puny shoulders, yes? then we are in agreement.
    your argument is invalid

    In the cases you give I am deprived of the product which is "pirated". Copying does not deprive the source of the product. You are making a very very strange comparison between copying and theft.

    Let me put it this way ... if someone can take my paycheck, and leave me with exactly every cent in that paycheck, then they are welcome to it and I invite everyone to do the same.

    not that I've ever encountered pirated software mind you

  10. The "low quality" software by SeaFox · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...must have more 0's and not as many 1's.

  11. Re:Why copy protection? by Cougem · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How is this insightful? Just asking a question which damns WGA doesn't mean you're worth modding up.

    This is 90% of professional piracy, therefore:
    1) There are other vendors (see the other 10%), who really probably can expand to fill the spaces - ESPECIALLY since if these guys were apprehended so long ago there is a fine vista market ready for targetting. If you've already managed to circumvent the protection then you're only going to be limited by distribution and manufacture, which is hardly that big a hurdle
    2) 90% of HIGH QUALITY piracy, NOT 90% of torrent downloaders and casual pirates. WGA, supposedly, protects against this, which is also a huge problem

    Just getting pissy with copy protection is hardly worthy of mod points.

  12. Nature Abhors A Vacuum by GomezAdams · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It won't be long given the pricing structure of Microsoft products that someone will step in to fill the orders for cheap knock offs. High quality or otherwise. I've been in the high tech shopping district in Taiwan and the prices for these pirated items are (usually) far below the price of legitimate copies.

    Also been in Mexico City where street vendors sell about any software title on the planet - some slick copies, some shoddy.

    And I doubt the 90% figure. Looks and smells like some marketing drone pulled it out of his @ss.

    --
    Too lazy to create a sig...
  13. Re: as opposed to casual piracy, where no money tr by DECS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    you have trouble seeing the difference between copied bits and the effort required to arrange those bits. The value of software isn't in the commercial packaging or plastic media, it's obviously in the efforts required to create something people will pay for. While you can argue a fallacy of "duplicating doesn't deprive you of the original copy," you're simply ignorantly wrong.

    Copying software doesn't deprive somebody of the version you copied, it deprives the creator/owner of their ability to legitimately sell copies of their work. That's what you are stealing when you copy.

    Your same silly argument could be applied to counterfeiting currency: copying real money doesn't deprive anyone of their legitimate currency. The problem is, it devalues money by depriving the government of its ability to regulate the supply and value of money. That's why the Secret Service exists.

  14. hmmmm by muszek · · Score: 4, Funny

    90% of the supply for a gigantic market is gone? Seems like a perfect business opportunity :)

  15. By what standard? by jdickey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course it's high quality; it just doesn't meet your needs.

    Vista is the first Windows infestation to officially, publicly acknowledge what serious MSFT-watchers have known for some time: the population of usees and customers are two entirely separate, non-overlapping groups.

    The usees, of course, are the poor sheeple who bought a PC and naively expect Windows to "work" because it's the "market" "leader".

    The customers are abviously the MPAA, RIAA and other "content" industry groups (collectively known as the MAFIAA (Media Authoritarian Fanatic Ass-farking of America) to friend and foe alike). Of course, "everyone" knows that all major media content these days is made using Macs or *nix boxen.

    Their customers are happy as the proverbial clams with Vista. Especially since they never have to actually touch it!

  16. Keys by PhotoGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There was no mention in the article how these pirates handled keys and activation and such.

    An exact copy of the pretty box and manuals and holograms and stuff is fine, but if it's an exact copy of the CD contents itself, it won't activate properly. Do they use hacked versions of the binaries? You'd think that would stand out (failed updates and such). Anyone know?

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.