Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Complaints Help Russian Gov't Pursue Political Opposition Groups
asaz989 writes "The New York Times reports that Russia selectively pursues software piracy complaints from Microsoft in order to suppress the opposition — confiscating computers for evidence, searching offices, and the like. Microsoft lawyers usually back the authorities in such cases, even when cases such as that of the environmentalist group Baikal Waves, which went out of its way to buy licenses to prevent police harassment and nevertheless had its offices raided, and its computers confiscated. Microsoft participated in this legal process. Published alongside this story, under the same byline, is a related piece on the collusion of Microsoft lawyers with corrupt Russian police in extorting money from the targets of software piracy investigations. In a responding press release, the company states, 'Microsoft antipiracy efforts are designed to honor both [antipiracy concerns and human rights], but we are open to feedback on what we can do to improve in that regard.'"
to open source, this is a prime example. Sheesh!
You know, while I know it's popular opinion to hate on Microsoft on slashdot, doesn't it seem to me that it's the Russian government abusing their own laws in order to screw the opposition, rather than Microsoft sitting there plotting how to hurt people? If it wasn't this, it would be something else.
Just sayin'..
Third world countries tend to be run by juntas, warlords, oligarchs and strongmen. They're like having the Mafia, except as your official government.
If you want to get anything done in these countries, you make nice with them. Either that, or you have to overthrow them.
This is why the CIA is routinely in bed with horrible people -- these horrible people run the horrible countries where they need to get things done.
Western businesses have taken a massive beating in Russia because everything is corrupt (Russia, as a country with minimal rule of law and an average IQ of 96, qualifies as third-world). They've started to play ball because short of that invasion, it's the only option.
In this case, while Microsoft is doing evil, it's also a necessary evil if they want to do business in Russia.
Futurist Traditionalism
There isn't one reason for NGOs continue to use microsoft software, in fact there are lots of reasons to not use it!
"but we are open to feedback on what we can do to improve in that regard.'"
Of course, such feedback might make you a target but hey...
Microsoft is inherently evil. Like kicking puppies.
Looks like a case of Russian authorities and Microsoft learning from each other about how to more efficiently violate human rights and get away with it. Considering how adept BOTH are at this within their own areas of expertise, it really isn't any real shocker. A real match made in hell,if you ask me.
Only way it could be worse would be if Microsoft was doing the same with authorities in the PRC.
Oh, wait,....they are.
On one hand, Microsoft has a right to complain about copyright infringement. Even I will not deny them that. On the other, Microsoft is probably aware of the selective nature of how Russian officials investigate and act on those claims. Should Microsoft, imagining for a moment that they have any sort of conscience, contribute to the oppression of human rights by issuing complaints?
As another pointed out, running Linux and free software on every machine will not quite end the problem. After all, Microsoft has long since campaigned against "naked PCs" and that they are likely to be software pirates unless they were sold with OEM Windows and OEM Office. Their complaints may well be in the form of "they are running PCs but we show no indication that they have licensed any software from us!" That would be reason enough, I suspect, to raid a location or two.
So, I have decided that Microsoft is a willing and complicit tool in this case. They can't not be aware of how their complaints are being used given their selective enforcement nature. And as far as Russian government officials are concerned, we are generally aware of the levels of government corruption within ex-Soviet countries. (I'll grant that the impression of government corruption in Russia is rather "cartoonish" in our understanding which is essentially belief without first-hand knowledge or evidence.) Microsoft should be more careful about issuing complaints. They aren't making examples of software pirates, in these cases, they are just being used as a weapon to "legitimately" attack political opponents.
If everyone stopped using Microsoft products and BUYING Microsoft products, Micorsoft would disappear quickly and could bribe (sorry... Help) no officials and the officials would stop listening to them.
The only problem with that is that it seems the majority of the world is STUPID and is still using Microsoft products and giving Microsoft their money.
STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES!
THINK ABOUT IT!
soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
> My money's on the $5 wrench. [xkcd.com]
Refusal (and therefore, I suppose, inability) to surrender your encryption keys in the UK is a crime. I suppose trying to use some system with deniability might be of use, but given the spirit of that law, I don't see it as an impossibility that the court would merely presume (based on other "evidence") that you have used the deniability features of whatever encryption system is installed, and jail you for not surrendering the (presumed) keys (even if you haven't used those features).
Why would you pay to use the products of an entity that is blackmailing you? Nobody ever won a war with their customers. Moreover, the message I get from this is that you can steal to your heart's content so long as you are not involved in political activism.
Folks, to be fair, you need to acknowledge that ALL public or commercial institutions in Russia are using genuine Windows (if they aren't using Linux). The situation with pirated Windows has drastically changed over the last few years. With fines and chances of legal pursuits considerably high, the use of pirated Windows is a major no-no for any organization.
However, that push started as early as in 2006, with the MS vs. Ponosov case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponosov's_case
And that's when people understood, that if a low-paid school teacher could face criminal charges for the use of pirated MS products in his school, that could get repeated everywhere.
It's really a shame that Clifford Levy didn't even mention Aleksandr Ponosov in his article. Yes, that person didn't voice anti-Governmental claims. But it's that case, when the MS started its push of a big corporation against an usual person.
I'm consider buying a notebook in Russia, and it will come with the pre-installed legal Windows system. Guess, why?