Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft To Court: Make Comcast Give Us Windows-Pirating Subscriber's Info (networkworld.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Microsoft is using the IP address 'voluntarily' collected during its software activation process to sue a Comcast subscriber for pirating thousands of copies of Windows and Office. The Redmond giant wants the court to issue a subpoena which will force Comcast to hand over the pirating subscriber's info. If the infringing IP address belongs to another ISP which obtained it via Comcast, then Microsoft wants that ISP's info and the right to subpoena it as well. "Defendants activated and attempted to activate at least several thousand copies of Microsoft software, much of which was pirated and unlicensed," Microsoft's legal team wrote. The product keys "known to have been stolen" from Microsoft's supply chain were used to activate Windows 8, Windows 7, Office 2010, Windows Server 2012 and Windows Server 2008. The product keys, Microsoft said, were used "more times than is authorized by the applicable software license," used by "someone other than the authorized licensee," or were "activated outside the region for which they were intended." Whether or not the IP traces back to a Comcast subscriber or was assigned by Comcast to a different ISP, as the The Register pointed out, "It would be a significant gaffe on behalf of the alleged pirates if the IP address data pointed to their real identifies."
So... Microsoft is protecting its intellectual property by using information that everyone knows is transmitted when Windows is activated? Why is this news?
Saved by the NAT!!!
As proven before, IP addresses are a really poor way to identify someone. Considering the circumstances, it could very well be a zombie PC in a larger botnet being identified.
...well, unless they are a complete idiot.
I wouldn't do something like this from my own IP address. That would be quite daft. I would instead find an open Wifi, or use a VPN or some other network where it can't be traced to me.
This is just going to get the owner of the IP snared up in the court system for no good reason. Microsoft should just invalidate the keys that were stolen and move on.
Considering the circumstances, it could very well be a zombie PC in a larger botnet being identified.
"His name was James Damore."
.. or if you want a decent OS.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
While MS should go after piracy on this scale, they should be denied their request, because:
product keys "known to have been stolen" from Microsoft's supply chain were used to activate Windows 8, Windows 7, Office 2010, Windows Server 2012 and Windows Server 2008.
If they were known to be stolen, then MS has a duty to limit losses. They can blacklist the keys and prevent further activation. If they were "known to have been stolen" then MS should have limited their losses as soon as they found out.
The product keys, Microsoft said, were used "more times than is authorized by the applicable software license,"
Again, MS has the ability to enforce this. Activation is their job, and if they allow a key to be activated thousands of times that's their fault. I commend them for being lenient - I've certainly relied on being able to activate a single key several times when building / upgrading PCs. But allowing thousands of fraudulent activations is a joke. More than a few a year should trigger alarm bells at Redmond.
used by "someone other than the authorized licensee," or were "activated outside the region for which they were intended."
MS can't prove either of these. Even if they know the authorized licensee, they don't know who is using the keys thousands of times. They can't know who it isn't without knowing who it is. If they knew who it is, they wouldn't need to subpoena for info. The same thing goes for the region.
It's also not the court's job to enforce the minutia of the license terms such as region, number of activations, transference, etc., especially when MS is so lackadaisical as to allow the keys to be stolen and for unauthorized activations to go on for so long.
If a bank robber used a blue Ford as a getaway car, that doesn't mean that the bank can subpoena the ownership records for every blue Ford so they can stop by their houses and see if that was the car that happened to be used in the robbery.
The bank can't do that, but the police said who investigate robberies can get the list for of blue Fords and compare the owner's names to known criminals. And to be a proper car analogy, they would be after a blue Ford with the license plate ABC123. If it turned out that the car was stolen for the bank job then that would be the same as a botnet that was using that IP address.
When they find out that Comcast static IP address(Houston, Tx) is a VPN node setup by some hacker, and the owner had no idea.
Or, it could be worse, and find out it's a Comcast public wifi IP addr that's been activating all those licenses.
.
Something many aren't aware of is if you change or upgrade your system you are subtracting numbers from a total allowed before your OS is no longer activated or legal and must be reactivated or re-purchased.
I use to know them for NT but it's been awhile. A CPU change I know counts as 2 points, a trick was to claim you had a NIC card as it added 2 points to the total.
“Significant” hardware changes can also trigger the Windows activation process again. For example, if you swap out multiple components on your PC at the same time, you may have to go through the activation process. Microsoft hasn’t explained exactly which hardware changes will trigger this.
http://www.howtogeek.com/18284...
But it's not the police that's trying to get the name of Comcast subscribers, it's Microsoft
That's because copyright infringement is not really a police matter, so it is quIte right for Microsoft to pursue this matter in court. The difference with the police doing it is that they can lookup the registration records without having to get a court order. Microsoft do not have that ability to simply examine the IP records for themselves so they have to go to court to compell Comcast to divulge the information (although the police would have to do that too since they don't have access to Comcast's private information).
Comcast were right in requiring Microsoft to get a court order to get the Customer details, and Microsoft were quite right for asking for them. If they aren't entitled to the details the the court will say no, but that won't be for the bogus reasons that have been stated here on Slashdot. Rather, it would be refused if they failed to show cause as required by the law.
Jesus, did IQs drop sharply round here or something?
God is dead, and you must be new here. There have always been idiots clicking submit.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"