Slashdot Mirror
Is Onlive Pirating Windows and Will It Cost Them?
An anonymous reader writes "When Onlive, the network gaming company, started offering not just Microsoft Windows but Microsoft Office for free on the iPad, and now on Android, it certainly seemed too good to be true. Speculation abounded on what type of license they could be using to accomplish this magical feat. From sifting through Microsoft's licenses and speaking with sources very familiar with them, the ugly truth may be that they can't."
Is it their fault that Microsoft didn't think they were literal when they wrote the planet Earth in as their location?
They are probably using the SPLA for this. That allows you to license software for your service on a monthly basis.
Seriously with Ubuntu Linux finally showing some decent polish and usability (yes yes I am referring to Unity which I have gotten used to) and OSX also available who really shives a git about Microsoft?
Let them drown in their cesspool! The problem of Microsoft is simple, they have tons of 20 year veterans in the middle tier running the show. These people believe that if we copy or provide similar features all will be ok on the USS Microsoft. What they don't realized is that they are fucked! With Windows 8 people will realize how dead this ship is. Sure Microsoft will still sell lots and lots of licenses to existing customers (can't underestimate their ability to squezze profits), but it is the next generation that will not pull along.
As somebody who used my last Windows operating system with Windows 7 I can say Microsoft is truly fucked! And I have been using Windows since 3.0 back in 1990!
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
(i know, i know.. i will punish myself later)
i read this as being: onlive is not presently legit but microsoft is playing nice (i.e. squeezing them for every last nickel without involving more than a few lawyers) for now -- until they lose patience (or feel threatened by being beating to market by an upstart.. not once but twice) and bring the sledgehammer down on onlive's entire business model -- windows and office desktop and gaming platform (xbox and windows games, at least)
, the ugly truth may be that they can't.
Well, no, not in your crappy backwater country, and not with some locked down hardware like an ipad. But in more sensible and advanced societies like, er, China, these kinds of things are readily available, and cheaper too.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
If Amazon EC2 can license Windows, surely OnLive can. Microsoft won't turn down an opportunity to make more money.
Yes, many MS products can be licensed on a per processor basis under SPLA. Microsoft Office is not one of these. SPLA is actually the easiest of MS's licensing offerings to understand and comply with. A pity they didn't check the article content with anyone who knows anything about it.
TFA title: Question? Assume-Answer-Is-Affirmative-And-Speculate-On-Negative-Consequences-And-Ignore-Possiblity-That-Question-Might-Be-Answered-Negatively.
It's fun but not really all the useful. I'm sure whatever Microsoft does specifically for the iPad will be much better plus this gets people used to MS Office on the iPad and kinda sets up the market for the real stuff coming up. So MS is probably just letting it happen and watching intently.
but I'm going to get it and the fact that it may screw MS makes it a bit sweeter.
Using Microsoft products is not screwing Microsoft. OnLive will go legit, they have no choice on the matter unless they kill the company. Microsoft will get their money and a heightened presence on the growing embedded market. Considering Microsoft is doing badly on embedded systems this is a great opportunity for them even if they gave free licenses for OnLive.
You want to help screw Microsoft? Don't use their products.
Would this mean a Cyber Cafe is also in violation? Is the license saying you can't rent out Window 7 machines? Or just that you can't rent out Window 7 machines over a network?
Microsoft licensing can be complex, but a service that offers office for free for end users? How long did these guys think they would get away with this? They are lucky that Microsoft is lenient with true-up licensing. However, how much are they going to have to fork out for all the current users of the product who haven't given them a dime. There is no way this service will continue without costing end users the same as it would for any other service. That's if they don't go bankrupt first.
The same thing would be happen if somebody setup a service hosting OS X and iLife.
I wish I had a moderation point called '-1 Moron'.
If it's not already clear, darn tootin' the next version of the volume license agreement will contain the "OnLive" clause that expressly forbids it...
TFA:
> The Windows 7 desktop just plain can’t be rented
I guess it's not precisely Windows 7, but I seem to be able to rent full Windows instances from EC2 for .12 / hour.
Great! I'm sure Microsoft would be pleased to have another user!
They once said if someone pirates software, they want it to be their software that is pirated. You're just furthering their control.
Great, thank you. My looney rant quota for today was a bit low,
Fair question which merits discussion. First, sreaming Crysis ... now pirating Office?
I hate to troll, but still think this company is trying to peddle technology that just isn't in demand, and when it is will be done by Apple, Microsoft, Google, or Sony.
I, for one, applaud any and all efforts to reduce the prevalence and use of Microsoft windows and office. Especially in the exploding mobile market where MS has practically 0 market share and has been unable to inflict its usual damage yet. With enough proactive efforts like these, MS will never gain a foothold in mobile and will helpfully fade along with the declining PC market.
I still don't quite understand OnLive's business model, or why anyone would go for it. I know how it works, they render everything server-side and send you compressed video - fine. The roundtrip latency is probably not all that bad, as long as you have a short route to the server. I'm fine with the technical aspects, but what about the money ? It seems to me like the only way they can make a buck is via mass pirating.
Those servers can't be cheap, each one is basically a mid-range gaming rig with a hardware video encoder, and can only serve one user at a time. Each needs a copy of the OS and games. You're basically renting access to a $1000+ gaming rig, plus bandwidth. Sure, the benefit is that just about any internet-connected device can now "play" PC games, but how does OnLive turn a profit ? Do they pool the game licenses so they only need as many paid keys as there are simultaneous players ? Or is this like all those ridiculous startups from the dot-com bust, where they spend fucktons of VC money and die a horribly quick death ?
Don't get me wrong, I like the technical merits of OnLive. Even as we said "this will never work", well surprise: it works amazingly well for many people. I just can't see how they can deliver this without charging fucktons of money for the privilege.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Most of the "you are not allowed to rent some software" licenses are invalid in many countries. So if they are hosting outside of US, it may be just okay.
Why would someone want to combine the overpriced hardware of Apple with the shitty software of MS?
I know what a PITA my most fav program is
here's a quote I found in about 4 seconds via google and site:libreoffice.org
"Opening MS Publisher files: Probably will never be implemented - not even other products by MS can open them. "
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
It's not clear to me what this software does, but if it's a terminal-like thingie that runs apps remotely rather than on the iPad (and that's believable, since the iPad isn't going to be able to run x86 code worth a damn), then it might be that Onlive merely installed Windows on some of their own computers, or maybe even bought them with Windows preloaded.
If that's what happened (especially if it's a preload), they might not be using licenses at all. Microsoft also doesn't sell any licenses that allow users to run Dwarf Fortress, but Windows users don't care, because they don't need any special permissions to do that; there's not a single word in copyright law saying Dwarf Fortress can't be run without authorization from the OS' copyright holder, just like there isn't anything saying an OS' copyright holder needs to authorize running X11 clients or "terminal servers" or whatever.
What I'm getting at is that Microsoft doesn't have a say in the matter for how Windows gets used/em>, so their statements about their licenses are irrelevant, unless Onlive is violating copyright. And maybe Onlive is doing that (are the iPads running copies of Windows?) but it's not clear they are.
This is Microsoft we're talking about.
Of course it's going to cost 'em!
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
and will you swallow? YES and YES!
Not sure why parent was modded down... that's straight from a MS EULA.
I8-D
Couldnt they get around the licensing by just giving people who log in a virtual machine running datacenter? Wouldnt that get them around the licensing?
As long as they're not based in the U.S., no one really cares about copyright. The WHOLE rest of the world half-asses the enforcement of IP protection in comparison. The only news that ever happen in that field are always caused by US interests trying to force a shrill, paranoid climate of fear of reprisal for innovating anything at all without having paid everyone else in the industry.
Abolish IP, solve the problem, adapt or die.
Making laws based on opinions that stem up from false informations leads to witch hunts.
Disclaimer: I worked there for two years, though I haven't been with OnLive since early 2010 (before the OnLive Desktop). I do not hold any OnLive or Microsoft stock at this time, and therefore don't have a horse in this race. It's just amusing to watch.
Something to consider. Steve Perlman, their CEO, was also the CEO of WebTV, which was sold to Microsoft. He knows the Microsoft execs at the highest level, and has a good business relationship with them. He also isn't stupid. I know that it's trendy to be cynical and hipster-esque about these things, and that it generates page views (and revenue from advertising, hence the motivation for TFA to appear as it did) to make this sort of speculation, but common sense dictates that no company of OnLive's size would do something as blatant and as public as wholesale commercial piracy. There is far too much to lose and very little to gain. In fact, one of OnLive's messages to software publishers is "software installed on OnLive cannot be pirated, because there is no external access to the binaries". Short of a hack that allows access to the back-end servers, you can no more pirate an app from OnLive than you can pirate AutoCAD by taking a photograph of the box. In that context, does any of TFA make sense?
In fact, the entire article seems to come down to "I, random bloggy guy with zero personal access to what's actually happening, am not aware of a licensing program that fits, therefore such a licensing program does NOT exist, and CANNOT exist. I'm not smart enough or educated enough or informed enough know how it works, therefore it cannot work." Pretty thin, if you ask me.
I do not have firsthand knowledge of this, but I know the people involved, at least on the OnLive side. They're not PirateBay; they are thoughtful people who are aware of the consequences of their actions and who want good business relationships with software publishers (including Microsoft). I think it is very likely that there is a deal in place which might not be a boilerplate license. It is also possible that such a license is part of a larger framework.
Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
More importantly, can I run Magic Jellybean KeyFinder on it?