Slashdot Mirror
Electronics-Recycling Innovator Faces Prison For Extending Computers' Lives
schwit1 shares a report from Los Angeles Times: Prosecutors said 33-year-old [Eric Lundgren, an electronic-waste recycling innovator] ripped off Microsoft by manufacturing 28,000 counterfeit discs with the company's Windows operating system on them. He was convicted of conspiracy and copyright infringement, which brought a 15-month prison sentence and a $50,000 fine. In a rare move though, a federal appeals court has granted an emergency stay of the sentence, giving Lundgren another chance to make his argument that the whole thing was a misunderstanding. Lundgren does not deny that he made the discs or that he hoped to sell them. But he says this was no profit-making scheme. By his account, he just wanted to make it easier to extend the usefulness of secondhand computers -- keeping more of them out of the trash.
The case centers on "restore discs," which can be used only on computers that already have the licensed Windows software and can be downloaded free from the computer's manufacturer, in this case Dell. The discs are routinely provided to buyers of new computers to enable them to reinstall their operating systems if the computers' hardware fails or must be wiped clean. But they often are lost by the time used computers find their way to a refurbisher. Lundgren said he thought electronics companies wanted the reuse of computers to be difficult so that people would buy new ones. He thought that producing and selling restore discs to computer refurbishers -- saving them the hassle of downloading the software and burning new discs -- would encourage more secondhand sales. In his view, the new owners were entitled to the software, and this just made it easier. The government, and Microsoft, did not see it that way. Federal prosecutors in Florida obtained a 21-count indictment against Lundgren and his business partner, and Microsoft filed a letter seeking $420,000 in restitution for lost sales. Lundgren claims that the assistant U.S. attorney on the case told him, "Microsoft wants your head on a platter and I'm going to give it to them."
The case centers on "restore discs," which can be used only on computers that already have the licensed Windows software and can be downloaded free from the computer's manufacturer, in this case Dell. The discs are routinely provided to buyers of new computers to enable them to reinstall their operating systems if the computers' hardware fails or must be wiped clean. But they often are lost by the time used computers find their way to a refurbisher. Lundgren said he thought electronics companies wanted the reuse of computers to be difficult so that people would buy new ones. He thought that producing and selling restore discs to computer refurbishers -- saving them the hassle of downloading the software and burning new discs -- would encourage more secondhand sales. In his view, the new owners were entitled to the software, and this just made it easier. The government, and Microsoft, did not see it that way. Federal prosecutors in Florida obtained a 21-count indictment against Lundgren and his business partner, and Microsoft filed a letter seeking $420,000 in restitution for lost sales. Lundgren claims that the assistant U.S. attorney on the case told him, "Microsoft wants your head on a platter and I'm going to give it to them."
MS has deep pockets
No, he illegally copied copyrighted software and somehow thought his 'intentions' would shield him from prosecution.
His argument is he sold CDs to people that supposedly lost their original CDs - how does that make it all right?
Ken
The discs had labels nearly identical to the discs provided by Dell for its computers and had the Windows and Dell logos. "If I had just written 'Eric's Restore Disc' on there, it would have been fine," Lundgren said.
A copy of a Windows disc is clearly not illegal. It is the license which Microsoft sells and which end-users or manufacturers pay for. They ruined this mans life over a trademark logo.
Let's make like a bird... and get the flock outta here.
"But we've changed", said Microsoft. "We're different. We're not the same bully we used to be. We're a kinder gentler Microsoft. See, we have Linux stuff in Windows now. Lots of nerdy Linux stuff. How could we be evil with Linux stuff, that automatically makes us good, right?"
It's no wonder the PC market as a whole has taken a beating over phones and tablets. It doesn't matter that most laptops still have Windows when most people for their day-to-day interactions want nothing to do with laptops, and desktops are essentially non-existent outside the corporate environment where they survive only because they are easier to physically chain to a desk. It's for this very reason, where Microsoft sues and arranges charges for its customers, where they have been high-handedly trying to extinguish anything like true innovation for decades that causes people to want to move away from the platform entirely.
It's telling how Microsoft's attempts to break out of the PC market have universally failed. It's like people have put Microsoft in its own jail. We have reluctantly accepted they remain a necessary evil for certain things, but no one will let them into any other market or paradigm because, quite frankly, they have repeatedly demonstrated (and still are) they simply cannot be trusted. Just as the internet moves to heal censorship, the computing world naturally moves to contain zMicrosoft. Their short and medium term strategies that were antagonistic to their consumers just can't create long term goodwill.
It's also interesting that Microsoft appears to have decided that they simply cannot innovate, since their strategy continues to be to threaten and extort their user base to continue to pay them.
Holy cow, did it ever occur to him, say after creating 10,000 20,000 illegal copies that MAYBE he should ask Microsoft for permission?
How did he make 28K discs? Did he hire a CD production house or some robot arm drive-feeding machine to make them?
Ken
If those second hand computers were originally sold with Microsoft licenses then they are still licensed, no matter where the software comes from I should think.
Microsoft themselves distribute the OS freely, but a license is what you need to run legit.
Most secondhand computers talked about here I think have such a license since they have restore discs available and thus Microsoft is contradicting itself.
If your second-hand PC has a Windows license sticker, you can just get a normal Windows installation disk, install Windows, and use the product key on the license sticker... What this guy did is clearly a copyright violation.
You can download windows images for free straight from microsoft.com. No verification of any kind or product key required. All he did was burn it on a dvd and hand it out as a freebie.
Windows is a virus.
brake the EULA = jail!
Not always true.
Some of the license keys on workstations (Dell, HP, etc.) only work with a specific OEM CD image. You can't always use the number on the computer with a generic vanilla version of Windows.
so ok jail time for an trademark miss usage?
I can see an civil law suit for misusing an logo but not jail/prison. Now what about just an disk the says jay's DELL windows restore disk. I can see dumber computer users saying is not an real disk vs the people who really want clean windows install disks.
Restore disks are NOT illegal the systems had keys with them just not the RESTORE DISKS.
Perhaps technically - but he was redistributing something that's already freely available. Sounds like he was basically just doing the "locate, download, and burn DVD" step - no new licenses, no breaking of copy protection, just saving people the trouble of finding, downloading and burning the discs themselves.
Of course the bit about "If I had just written 'Eric's Restore Disc' on there, it would have been fine," suggests that perhaps the real crime is trademark infringement, as the discs were made to resemble the original restore discs, right down to the trademarked logos. Or perhaps he just meant they wouldn't have drawn official attention.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
MS does not make XP ISO's. Vista have to hunt for an link. 7 on the MS site just punch in your key to get it. (needed to hunt for it the past for it) 8 and newer tool to download ISO no key needed for download load.
that ended with vista (some iso are ver locked) easy to mod them to all. After vista they went all in one.
All he did was burn it on a dvd and hand it out as a freebie.
"He thought that producing and selling restore discs to computer refurbishers -- saving them the hassle of downloading the software and burning new discs -- would encourage more secondhand sales."
I'm guessing they went after him because he didn't pay the extortionist's fees. They may provide the download for licensed users but they restrict the resale. First sale doctrine theoretically should protect him I think as you have a right to resell and all he did for all intensive purposes was make a backup of a CD that was locked to the systems he clearly had a license for [assuming the first sale doctrine applies to licenses and not just tangible goods].
what is next PRISON for not paying windows core packs for each server in your VM farm even if you just need say 3-4 windows VM and the rest is all Linux VM's running under ESXI or LIBVIRT. That is an civil issue over licensing rules not an criminal case. This case seems to be more about BS over licensing rules and not an criminal case like shoplifting.
Say like Accidental Shoplifting and "Accidental" as in you did not fully follow out very complex rules in full.
windows 8 and newer auto load bios keys and reuse old keys from the same hardware after an os reload. ALSO ALL 7 and 8.X systems get free windows 10
I hate ordering a new notebook and having to pay extra to get an OS restore disk. If they wanted a couple bucks to cover the cost of the physical media that would be acceptable but the ISO to burn your own restore disk ought to be a free download with proof of a system purchase.
Windows 10 with a Windows 7/8.x Key issues where it still works but MS that was to be temporary. So on paper we have an at BEST an EULA issue with doing that but MS really does not want cut it off for real also there is the issue if the systems did have 10 on them at some before the paper cut off they are OK to reload 10 again on paper.
But Still it's not an criminal issue to do any thing with this.
This man should be charged with two crimes:
1) Possible trademark infringement.
2) Thinking that installing Windows on a computer would make it useful.
If the first deserves jail, the second is most likely a death sentence.
For those not aware of how this works, it's not an illegal copy. To install Windows on a PC, you need a install disc PLUS a key... the content of those discs can be downloaded online or made with any Windows computer to be used in another. In order for you to install it in a new pc, you need a key that will be validated for that machine alone. The recycled computers had them... Dell desktops comes with a sticked on it with said key. No one getting those DVDs needed a pirated copy, just a install disc, which again, anyone can get without paying a dime.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-u...
The restitution for lost sales is just bullshit, even if the dvds had pirated content, which they didn't.
It is fucking shameful that a corporation this big would throw a guy that's trying to do some good in jail without understanding how their own OS works.
Right to repair needs to say that restore files are free and that an EULA / DMCA can not be used to stop people from hosting files and or selling EPROM's at CHIP cost + shipping.
Still an EULA case not an criminal case
What he should do publicly with as much publicity as he can is to install Linux on the old computers.
Tell everyone that by using Linux they can restore an old computer into something useful, Tell them it comes with a word processor, spreadsheet etc all for FREE.
Tell that they come with Linux and Open Office because they can NOT be used any longer with Microsoft products
Make a BIG noise about 28,000 linux boxes being available because MS/Dell won't allow them to used as Windows boxes.
Make it a big public event, "world biggest linux install marathon" or some such even, get volunteers, school kids wanting to learn, make as much fucking noise about it that you can.
Call it a " what you can do without windows" event, see if one of the Linux Magazines will supply 28,000 CDs to give away.
Basically tell Microsoft they can shove themselves from now on
Tell the world that MS wants a line of working/usefull PCS approx 8000 miles long trashed for no good reason
Put the figure into tons of waste
How high the pile would be if they were sacked on top of each other
How much energy will be wasted (ie something like enough energy to power 5,000 homes, or drive a Prius around the world or what ever.
Make them look like polluting wankers
At that point I see the whole problem going away real quick
The case centers on "restore discs," which can be used only on computers that already have the licensed Windows software and can be downloaded free from the computer's manufacturer, in this case Dell.
Where is this link where you can download the Windows restore installation disc for a Dell PC?
Seriously, I have to look at my uncle's Dell PC this weekend and he does not have the restore discs for it. The sticker with the product key is on the machine. I've tried to reinstall the DVD codec drivers for it in the past and could find no place on Dell's site I could download the installer at all.
Technically a temporary violation has the copy was waiting for a licensed computer, until it reached a licensed computer a copyright violation, clearly a civil matter not a criminal matter once it was investigated. That the filthy animal prosecutor choose to serve the corrupt entity M$ to destroy some old dude for a technicality is disgusting, why not just kill him you POSs, fucking disgusting.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
The US attorney just shows what is wrong with the US justice system.
That guys probably already got his place in the Microsoft legal team...
They do not exist to prevent a taking of resources from someone (aka harm), but solely to prevent anybody from trying to prevent psychopaths from taking everyone else's resources.
Like copyright. Aka the privilege of stealing real money that people worked for, and giving mere copies in return, that nobody worked for, to fuel their cocaine addiction.
Just like those psychopaths redefined "freedom" as "the freedom from *your* freedom" and "the freedom to harm you".
And the livestock of the psychopaths, like you, is who allows that to exist.
> If copying software which has already been paid for and is specifically attached to hardware isn't "fair use," what is
Well the discs this guy was selling weren't attached to any particular hardware, and he didn't pay Microsoft for them, but that still leaves your question "what is fair use?"
The four factors considered for fair use are:
transformative use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken
the effect of the use upon the potential market
Transformative use is the degree to which the user turns one thing into something else. Making a statute from baseball cards would transform them from cards to sculpture. This person did no transformation, just straight duplication.
The nature of the copyrighted work is considered on at least two axis. Non-fiction works are easier to use fairly than more creative, fictional, and especially complete fantasy works. Facts themselves have no copyright protection at all, only the particular expression and arrangement of them can have any protection. A fictional work that takes place in a completely fictional universe is less likely to be fair use because the author created that whole universe - there's probably no reason you *have* to step into their universe.
Also regarding the character of the original work, published works are more available for fair use than unpublished works. I have the right to keep my private writing private, and decide when and how to make it public. Similarly, works that have become a widely recognized part of the culture have less protection. If you wrote a book about American culture in 2018, you might have very good reason to quote CNN, etc.
The amount of the work taken is fairly self-explanatory. It's generally fair to use a five-word quote out of a book. Copying the entire book is not okay. There is a wide range of in-between. Also, what percentage of the new work consists of stuff taken from other people's work? If you write a 20,000-word book and have 300 words of quotes in it, that's probably okay. This guy copied the entirety of MS Windows, and added nothing of his own. That's the opposite of fair use.
The effect of the use upon the potential market - will some people buy the infringing work *instead of* the original work? If you make wall plaques each with a quotes from a bunch of books, nobody is going to buy the wall plaques instead of the books. You haven't hurt the market for the books. This guy was going to be selling Windows discs. Had he not had these 28,000 Windows discs for sale, would some people instead buy from Microsoft?
One could make the argument that some users may already have a Windows license, they effectively already own a copy of Windows, and he was helping them use the licensed copy of Windows they already owned. That may be a cogent argument. Fair use? Not by a long shot.
sorry I meant GNU/Linux
NOW, let it be clearly known that I DESPISE Microsoft, and all their evil, and their abuse of various systems that they've committed and been found in some cases, in a court of law, to have abused, illegally, a lot of laws meant to protect competition. BUT... that's for the legal system to sort out, not cause for stealing from them. MOREOVER, there are, as I've pointed out, alternatives, BETTER alternatives, and the "I'm just trying to keep e-Waste out of landfills argument falls flat as well. Unless you can demonstrate that you've never polluted anything in your life, never consumed anything, never done anything resulting in stuff ending up in landfills, (like all the discs you pirated, for example,) your claim that you were just trying to protect the environment rings hollow.
The effort you put in to ripping off Microsoft could have been put into educating people on how to use any one of the many free alternatives to MS WinDOS, or helping to develop said alternatives to make them even more attractive options. Instead, you disregarded laws in-place to protect the authors of creative works, hiding behind the flimsy shield of "I was trying to help prevent e-waste from ending up in landfills!"
You're not Batman, you're not Robin Hood... you're just that guy going to jail. The slashdot summary is the kind of fake-news, clickbait bullshit this site is rapidly devolving into a cesspit FULL of.
[...] faces prison time for extending computers' lives [...]
Yeah, and I think I might go and pull books out of dumpsters behind book stores, (before those cease to exist) that have had their covers torn off, to "extend their lives" too. (Or not, since that's also called THEFT. Look it up if you don't already know about this. Taking, selling, buying, etc., books reported to publishers or distributers as DESTROYED (a
Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
I doubt there would be any case brought if he simply provided an alternate path to access the image of the disc. Thatâ(TM)s not what happened here.
He copied the software onto discs, and sold those copies. Thatâ(TM)s pretty clear infringement.
Do not portray this guy as some recycling hero. He was making money here.
Qed
Never go full Windows. Ever
Sounds like he was basically just doing the "locate, download, and burn DVD" step - no new licenses, no breaking of copy protection, just saving people the trouble of finding, downloading and burning the discs themselves.
Except, you forgot to add that he tried to sell them. He wasn't burning and selling CDs of shareware as was so popular in the 1990s, he was burning and selling a disc full of MS software.
Ken
That is an civil issue over licensing rules not an criminal case.
The two are not mutually exclusive. If you steal my wallet, that's a criminal case because the government has an interest in preventing theft, and it's a civil case because I want you to pay back the money you took. If you get drunk and rear end my car, it's a criminal case because the government has an interest in preventing drunk driving, and it's a civil case because I want you to pay for the damage and my injuries.
Licencing issues cross over into criminal territory when they involve fraud, or when you do it "willfully and for purposes of commercial advantage" (see Copyright Act, section 506). In practice, this means it becomes criminal when you cross over a loose threshold and make a business out of infringing copyrights. Which numbnuts here certainly did.
He wanted to sell CDs to other refurbishers that contained Microsoft copyright protected software and had Microsoft logos on the disc.
That's a little different than running unlicensed Windows VMs on a server.
Ken
It says right on the Windows CD: "Do not make illegal copies of this disk". That's why I only make completely legal copies of my Windows disks.
He was selling restore discs that require someone already have a valid licence key.
Allowing someone to use something they already purchased shouldn't count as a "lost sale"
Pretty much as useful and no hassles with copyright. Probably also runs a lot better on old hardware.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
It is true those are the four factors that MUST be considered. A court CAN consider other factors. Indeed a judge, and police as well, often consider the universal factor "is he being a bad guy or a good guy?" The letter of the law only goes so far - judges also seek justice, most of the time. (Obviously in plea bargains the judge never hears the case, but that's a different topic entirely.)
Having said that, the factors that MUST be considered all weigh very much against this defendant *for a fair use defense*. There are other defenses, besides fair use. Remember these factors MUST be considered:
How much of the work did the defendant take? A six-word quote from a book is normally okay, taking the whole work almost never is. This defendant took the whole thing.
How much new and original did the defendant add?
If the infringing work is mostly new, with only a small part borrowed, that may be fair use. If the infringer added nothing of their own, it's likely not fair use. This defendant added nothing.
Transformative - is the infringing work of a fundamentally different kind than the original work? In this case it's not at all different, it's a duplicate.
This person may have a good defense, but not a fair use defense.
Send him to prison for 175 years!
It is still protected by copyright.
bloody fucking hell, the computers all had explicit licenses from Microsoft to run said software.. Are you telling me that it's illegal to make a copy of your windows CD and install from the copy? wow, then everyone is breaking the law because who installs from the original copy? Everyone installs from copies.
Also, these restore discs were not just vanilla Windows, I'm pretty sure they were manufacturer-specific recovery to get back to OEM state - trial software and all.
yeah and if look at the EULA on this third-party software, it says that it is allowed to run it on on the hardware it was designed for, which is exactly what they are doing
so what the fuck is your beef anyway, twit?
What he should do publicly with as much publicity as he can is to install Linux on the old computers.
just in case you're not aware, you can't put toothpaste back in the tube, you can't un-ring a bell, and you can't undo a criminal activity
'assistant U.S. attorney on the case told him, "Microsoft wants your head on a platter and I'm going to give it to them."'
Should be enough for a dismissal of said attorney and a new trial set up. It should also be investigated if others on state level were equally biased.
The attorney works for the state, not a company and must remain neutral.
Furthermore the case could be tricky because of trivial details, but it in NO WAY hurt M$ business, 'cept that using old, yet legally valid, sw hurts them from dumping their next pile of rubbish.
As others have pointed out, you can legally download the install images and burn them and whatnot. And you can also legally burn them to a dvd. And you can also equally give them out.
I see no issue with getting some money for doing said service that most people could do all on their own. Is he selling the software or is he selling the service?
If the latter were the case, ALL services that offer you 'linux on a USB-Stick' would be in deeeep trouble.
Funny thing is, it just happens i had this issue with a neighbor 2 days ago as he could no longer find his Win7 install DVD. So we just downloaded it from M$ (yep with 'download here' and instructions and all) and I burned it to DVD on my Mint. M$ clearly allows all this, and one could argue even encourages it as they hope people will use the DVDs to install Win on it and then will follow up and buy a key.
The old paradigm 'cd/dvd = the value' i.e. if you own the medium (and naturally the key) you have purchased it as been dead a LONG time ago. Today having the key means you bought it. Owning the install medium (which is not even actually sold in a lot of instances any more) means nothing.
Services like Steam was the last straw that killed that mule.
What the guy did is not so much illegal as it is a pain in M$ and found some obscure detail and a (potentially) completely IT-illiterate judge and then enlisted the state to fight their wars for them.
[insert insult to M$ here o/c]
If you walk into a 7-11, and steal a 50 cent pack of gum, it's a criminal matter. If Comcast knowingly overcharges 10 million people, it's a civil matter. What little punishment there is for companies, they're not allowed to write themselves out of with a single sentence in a 27 page EULA. Google violates copyright all day long, but nobody there worries about jailtime. This guy has to worry about it, though. And regardless of what the "law" says (which was created by wealthy people for wealthy people), people are getting sick of the disparity. As they should be.
With that "transformative" bit, you grossly misrepresented one of the four pillars of fair use. The law actually says that one of the factors that must be considered is the purpose and character of the use. The transformative nature of that use is just one of many possible purposes and characters that copying can involve. By narrowing that pillar to a fraction of its actual size, you're fairly seriously understating the types of use that can constitute fair use.
If the content is truly available for them to download already from the manufacturer, then arguably the person merely provided an offline cache of the content, which otherwise the customer would have been forced to download and burn him/herself. You might even argue that he was merely serving as an agent of the purchaser, which would entirely relieve him of any responsibility for the copying. It is laughable to argue that it is not a copyright violation for the end owner to download the content, burn it to a disc, install the OS, keep the disc, and later sell the computer with the disc to someone else, but that it somehow becomes a copyright violation if someone skips the installation and forces the person who buys the machine to do that part. This fails on grounds of reductio ad absurdum. Yet unless I'm misunderstanding, that's exactly the finding in this case.
You're also grossly misrepresenting the effect on the value of the work. From a legal perspective, making a backup copy of software is a right. Therefore, the original owner of that hardware had a legal right to make a backup, and because OEM licenses are not transferrable to new hardware, that right is automatically transferred to any subsequent owner of the hardware.
The fact that the original disc was lost, and that the backup was made from someone else's physical copy of that disc is immaterial from a legal perspective, as copyright law generally does not specify any requirements about how a backup must be made (with the exception of DMCA nonsense). If I can make an identical copy by scraping the bits off a DVD-ROM or downloading the file from somewhere on the Internet, one act cannot reasonably be legal while the other is not unless the person never had a license to possess a copy of that software in the first place. Such an interpretation of the law would, again, be utterly prima facie absurd.
The fact that some users might not know they have the right to make a backup copy of their operating system, and therefore might be tricked into paying for something that they already legally owned is also immaterial, as the exact same impact on Microsoft's sales could be caused by instead including a piece of paper that says, "Did you know that you have a legal right to download a copy of Windows from [insert website], burn it to a disk, and install it on this machine?" which is absolutely not a copyright violation. Therefore, the additional impact of the copyright violation is precisely zero, and thus, the total financial impact to Microsoft from this person's actions is also precisely zero.
IMO, this being fair use really should be inarguable, at least in any sane universe. The judge is simply interpreting the law incorrectly, in a way that, when taken to its logical conclusion, leads to some bafflingly absurd consequences.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
You're saying that if I buy a 2nd hand computer in America that the software on it isn't mine to use?
FIX YOUR STUPID LAWS!!!!
I can't believe how much you let yourself get screwed. And no wonder American companies keep trying to export your insane IP laws to the whole planet.
Probably a heavy-handed scare tactic to prevent this kind of thing from catching on too much w/ other recyclers, eroding 1 of their main existing revenue streams.
Actually the guy was helping Microsoft if he keeps on distributing old version of Windows which would be used for old hardware. Free Marketing for M$ with those discs containing old Win versions, free distributor, free trial/demo version for the old OS! M$ profit margin would only be hit if GNU/Linux was distributed to refurbishers. If Linux was distributed (ie Mint/Ubuntu/Debian etc) many people would be impressed with the power and slickness of Linux compared to M$.
I think the judge didn't quite understand that the software was licensed for use anyways and only a total idiot would have bought a store bought version of windows for it when they could have downloaded the same software from dell or ms themselves
WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT IS THAT THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS THAT CAME ON THEM CAN'T EVEN BE TRANSFERRED TO AN ANOTHER COMPUTER. so after that you would be stuck with two windows licenses for one computer, with one license thats not even transferable(which is bullshit in its own).
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
> The law actually says that one of the factors that must be considered is the purpose and character of the use.
Let's read exactly what the copyright statute says:
---
Purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
---
The law says the court must consider if it's commercial (he was selling them for $20) as opposed to nonprofit educational.
> The additional impact of the copyright violation is precisely zero, and thus, the total financial impact to Microsoft from this person's actions is also precisely zero.
And THAT is a reasonable defense. Or half defense. The penalty does depend on the amount of financial harm.
The refurbishers buying his discs for $20 could instead download a restore disc from Dell for free. So he argues there is no loss.
They could also buy a fresh Windows from Microsoft for $25. If they DID pay $20 for his bootleg disc instead of downloading for free, it's reasonable to figure some of them would otherwise pay $25 for a genuine Windows. Again, his customers are companies paying $20 for a disc with the Windows logo - knowing they'll all pay $20, some would go to $25 for the real thing, if his $20 bootleg wasn't available. Therefore we can say that some, but not all, would have otherwise bought from MS. Therefore his penalty was perhaps greater than it should have been under the law - it was based on $25 per disc.
>. only a total idiot would have bought
The refurbishers he was selling to had three options:
Legitimate copies from Microsoft for $25
His copies with the Microsoft logo for $20
Download for free from Dell
If they WOULD pay him $20 for the fake, some would have paid $25 for an original Microsoft copy, if he hadn't been selling them for $20.
Why not just download a copy from Dell and burn it to a CD-R? Thanks would be an interesting question to ask the shops who would have bought from him.
If you think that the this bot is probably older than you.
This bot is older than Facebook.
It is true those are the four factors that MUST be considered. A court CAN consider other factors. Indeed a judge, and police as well, often consider the universal factor "is he being a bad guy or a good guy?" The letter of the law only goes so far - judges also seek justice, most of the time. (Obviously in plea bargains the judge never hears the case, but that's a different topic entirely.) ...
Plea bargains are a perversion of justice and should be abolished sooner rather than later, together with other perversions of justice like capital punishment and strict liability offenses.
If a prosecutor has to resort to tactics such as plea bargaining, his case is very weak to say the least and there is 99% chance that the suspect is innocent of the crime he is being accussed of.
And on the Eighth Day, Man created God.
I remembered that this would only work for retail keys, and it said so on the website. Now it doesn't. Interesting. I should try with a Windows 7 OEM key, one of these days.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
If the PC makers already have a copy of Windows on these PC's. Then why would he have to create disks? Seems to me he is trying to give people a unlicensed copy of a Windows version that did not come with the PC new. This would indeed be a violation of license terms. If he was handing out OEM copies that were created by the PC maker that would be a different story. Sounds like he was making retail copies of Windows which depending on which version may never have been licensed to that hardware.
I miss gnaa posts.
Post-SystemD, Linux isn't an option anymore.
Buggy, crashing, vexing piece of shit is what LINUX is now.
Install a linux distribution
No Windows 7 and 8.x do not get free windows 10 that was last year
Mendacem Memorem Esse Oportet
Sounds like he was basically just doing the "locate, download, and burn DVD" step - no new licenses, no breaking of copy protection, just saving people the trouble of finding, downloading and burning the discs themselves.
Except, you forgot to add that he tried to sell them. He wasn't burning and selling CDs of shareware as was so popular in the 1990s, he was burning and selling a disc full of MS software.
Yeah, he was probably trying to sell them for cheaper than the price that most OEMs charge to make and ship you out a replacement restore disk. That bullshit has become a damn racket. A few years ago, they often refused to host restore ISO images online just so they could charge customers some asinine fee to feed a CD-R into a duplicator and press the "GO" button.
Electronics-Recycling Innovator Faces Prison For Extending Computers' Lives
If I was a piano player that lost two fingers in my band saw, and lost my piano-playing job because I couldn't play as required, it would be logically incorrect to say, "Piano player fired for losing fingers in accident." It's wrong because I could lose those fingers and keep my job if I could still play just as well. Losing the fingers isn't the causative factor, not being able to play is the causative factor, so losing fingers cannot accurately be reported as the "for" in the headline.
Similarly, this "innovator" could have extended the lives of second-hand computers by purchasing legitimate copies of Windows, or including free operating systems with them. That means extending the life of these computers cannot logically be said to be the reason he is facing prison. He is not facing prison FOR extending the useful life of a computer, he's facing prison for illegally distributing Windows.
Dell used to include an install partition on the disk to re-install the O/S. Where Mr. Lundgren screwed up was when he was selling those discs. That's the fraud part.
Useless MS software though, which you can download free from Microsoft, since MS has shifted everything to usage licenses with online activation. If you don't already have a license, the software is useless. He was selling the convenience of not having to download and burn it yourself.
Of course, copyright still applies, so useless or not, he would need a license to copy it legally.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Yep. And you can download Win10 from MS today, and install it on a PC with a Win7/8 license, so long as you either use assistive technologies or are at least willing to fraudulently claim to. Nothing he's doing changes things in the slightest - except that you don't have to download the several gig .iso file and burn it yourself.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
It important to remember these moments because there will be a time in which Microsoft is in need.. And people have long memories.. It has never been about the software. It has always been about the money.
When I ran a Help Desk I would make copies of of the Dell discs for every model of system we got in. The main reason was because the technicians would always lose them, and the original discs were always poorly labeled or hard to find which variation of a model they went to. The dude in the article made a HUGE mistake by trying to sell them, even worse if he was trying to use them on non-Dell systems. By selling the discs to refurbishers he is unable to verify they even have a computer with a Windows license sticker on the outside. His goose is cooked, the only thing he has left to do is file for bankruptcy.
That's a death threat right there. The assistant U.S. attorney should be sent to prison.
#DeleteFacebook
He was trying to make money using someone else's property that makes him a thief plain and simple. Just because he was stealing from scumbags doesn't make it legal. If he was illegally selling LINUX discs or any other freeware you people would be calling for his execution. Giving something away for free doesn't negate your copyright that is a key cornerstone of open source.
This is a completely stupid dick ass fucking move by Microsoft. How dare they screw this guy over, after all the good he has done. FUCK MICROSOFT for caring about a few pennies instead of the environment and the poor ass motherfuckers who want ancient refurbed computers.
My understanding is a "restore" disk does not have the OS image. It only has tools to help fix a broken installation.
If the hard drive in the PC has been wiped there is nothing it can do.
But this post says he put the OS image on the disk too.
Also, the OS image and restore disk is still insufficient. Post install the OS will contact the Microsoft activation servers to match the hardware signature. If it can't match it will not have a valid license.
So I'm not sure what he's done here.
Maybe it's just about mass producing disks for distribution with Microsoft and Dell logos on them without a license.
That was a bad idea. I wouldn't want to see his life destroyed over it though. I hope they can come to some reasonable arrangement.
Disk even copied with the sale of the computer seems legit to me.
My immediate reply to the AG could have been,"Yeah? Well I know your wife already has your dick in her handbag, so good luck!"
-
I think the website did not like the OEM keys but the installer DID
doctrine of first sale says OEM software does
"Activist faces prison for feeding hungry"
Activist steals food from grocery store to sell to hungry people, faces prison time.
How is that different from what this electronics recycler did?
(OK, stealing copyright-protected software is not exactly the same as stealing physical food stuffs from a store.)
Ken
The discs had labels nearly identical to the discs provided by Dell for its computers and had the Windows and Dell logos. "If I had just written 'Eric's Restore Disc' on there, it would have been fine," Lundgren said.
I'm not sure what he was trying to do here. Why make it look like an official MS disc? Why not just label it 'Restore Disc'? He had to have known that he had no right to go producing things that had another company's logo/information on it and trying to pass it off as his own.
Could we start banning clickbait headings?
This is another case where Linux could be a niche. You would think Linux would be perfect for old computers, that this would be a market niche they could capitalize on. You would be wrong. Unfortunately Linux breaks its driver compatability WITH EVERY RELEASE. They absolutely refuse backward compatability. They also on an irrational whim deleted XAA and dozens of drivers for older cards. The mentality of Linux devs seems to be that no one would ever want to use a computer that is older than three years and everyone should have the latest and greatest $1000 workstation. Not only does this make life hell for hardware manufacturers that would want to provide a driver but also means Linux shoots itself in the foot by neglecting a prime market segment due to the arrogant mentality of some developers. The lack of backward compatibility and cross compatability with Windows (with Wine thinking 40% compatibility is "adequate") remains Linux biggest barriers to adoption.
But hasn't M$ (and others) been telling us for years that the license is irrevocably tied to the hardware? Doesn't Windows 7 and above explicitly say it is tied to identifiers in the CPU, MOBO etc?
The dirty truth is they just want as much money as they can possibly get, any way they can get it. They have made the saying "digital no rights" a defacto truth. And nothing will change as long as we keep electing politicians more interested in lobbyist dollars than representing their constituent's interests. The Democrats held super-majorities in both houses and the presidency from 2008 for two years and did nothing. Sad.
If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
I mean, seriously - reuse of all that is good for the environment.
If anything, the appeals court should get him out of there not because he made a mistake but because he did good.
Dear Corporations,
I solemnly swear, I will NEVER purchase a single license, program, movie, television show, song, or other product you sell. I vow to spend every spare dollar I have in the pursuit of knowledge and the devaluation your company, your profit margin, and your useless "shareholders" while striking your devious and vile companies, and all others like you, from the face of this world.
Though I will almost never personally use your code, watch your videos, listen to your songs, or utilize your services; with every click of my mouse, I will actively acquire and distribute pirated copies of each and every byte of data your company has in a bid to bring your profit margins to zero.
While you lobby and demand laws to break my mind and pillage my wallet, I'll quietly watch as countless others like me, byte by byte and line by line, carry your worthless husk to the pyre where we will watch in silent awe as you and your company burns.
Sincerely,
Every software pirate ever.
Why should there be ANY cost attached when the computer already has a legitimate license that has already been paid in full?
MS does not make XP ISO's. Vista have to hunt for an link.
Bollocks. I just downloaded Windows XP .isos from the MSDN Subscriber portal a couple of weeks ago. Everything as far back as Windows 2000 is still available there. Probably further back if I cared to look.
What the hell is wrong with Microsoft - their customers paid them for their damn OS, and now this? Put them up against a wall and execute them.
I thought the Windows OS was licensed to the computer - not the user? If the machine was "refurbished", it still should have a valid MSFT license from the original build!