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.'"
I didn't think there was such a thing as high-quality Microsoft software, pirated or otherwise...
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?
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.
90% sounds like a nice marketing department developed figure.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
The more interesting story would be, how did they catch him?
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."
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.
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
...must have more 0's and not as many 1's.
::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.
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.
90% of the supply for a gigantic market is gone? Seems like a perfect business opportunity :)
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!
>>
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.
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
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.