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
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.
He didn't sell the discs. He provided the discs for free with computers that already had an OS license sticker on them. If the computer didn't have a license sticker then he didn't provide a disc.
He gave CDs to make computers that had already had licensed versions of Windows on them able to run Windows again. It's not like those licensed versions of Windows were moved to another computer.
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.
MAYBE he should ask Microsoft for permission?
To be honest, who would it really occur to that Microsoft would ever GRANT permission. If they are obviously going to say no, why ask?
Now what would occur to me, would absolutely be to not put trademarked logos on the disc. I would have made some leet graphic from the Matrix or the like and put that on the disc. Maybe a photo of Rick Astley on the cover, which would be fitting given the mission of the discs.
Did he hire a CD production house
Well it said he hired someone in China to make them, so yes.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If copying software which has already been paid for and is specifically attached to hardware isn't "fair use," what is?
That's why there's a case - your claim that "he illegally copied copyrighted software" isn't cut-and-dry.
Microsoft's argument is that they're being deprived of revenue for something they've already been paid for - how does that make it all right?
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Well, that is still copyright infringement though. Just because MS is giving things away for free, doesn't mean that you can do so - it's still protected by copyright law, which means you need an explicit license to duplicate it.
Perhaps you could have an argument if you individually downloaded every copy before burning. Horribly wasteful of course, but then you could argue that Microsoft was the one distributing copies, and you were only redistributing software you had acquired legally. The fact that the final result is identical either way might be enough to give a savvy lawyer an argument to stand on.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
So let's say you know someone who is recycling used computers with valid OEM licenses and following this exact process and you need the Windows OEM install media to restore windows on the machine. Now, you can go to Dell's web site and download and burn one for free, or you have a friend who has done that already and he gives you a copy of it for you to use.
Should your friend in that situation then go to jail for giving you a copy to use to restore the computer with a valid license with? 'Cause that's what this case is about.
The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
Lundgren does not deny that he made the discs or that he hoped to sell them
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
"If he didn't have a piece of paper showing he got a license for every single piece of hardware, he has no rights to sell the software."
If Microsoft doesn't have a piece of paper with the original purchaser's signature on it, they have no contract.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
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
Yeah, this is clear-cut copyright infringement, and the headline is a flat out lie. If he was just refurbishing old hardware, no problem. If he was refurbishing old hardware and had made arrangements with Microsoft regarding copies of Windows, that would be fine. If he was refurbishing old hardware and pre-installing Linux or another operating system that allows copies to be handed out for free, still completely fine.
Whatever other details are going on, he got busted for distributing copyrighted software he didn't have the right to, not recycling hardware.
> 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.
He didn't sell the discs.
Yes he did. Both TFS and TFA make that clear.
He provided the discs for free ...
No he didn't.
If the computer didn't have a license sticker then he didn't provide a disc.
He claims to have sold the discs to "refurbishers" who may, or may not, have checked for stickers.
Seriously, you have to at least read the posted summary to comment - OK?
Lundgren does not deny that he made the discs or that he hoped to sell them.
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.
So, do you still think he made 28,000 restore CDs to give away?
Ken
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.
The OEM license only extends to the original manufacturer and its first consumer or another consumer they directly transfer the license to (both parties have to explicitly agree to the transfer and the original owner is seemingly liable for compliance of its next owner) and the hardware has to stay with the software.
This is factually incorrect.
The law says you are wrong, and Microsoft says you are wrong.
A retail license extends to a consumer. An OEM license extends to a computer.
A computer can not grant permission for anything, let alone transferring its license. An OEM license never applies to a human being, so it can't be transferred by one.
Even Microsoft says this:
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/mssmallbiz/2009/10/27/no-oem-microsoft-windows-licenses-cannot-be-transferred-to-another-pc/
As you can see, the OEM Windows license is âoelockedâ to the original PC it comes with and cannot be transferred to any other PC.
The license remains with the computer. The original owner discarded the computer+license. This shop picked up the computer+license. When they resell it, it will still be the computer+license.
The license MUST remain with the computer, the reseller shop can't legally seperate the two if they wanted.
All of these computers have a valid license
What's more, the Windows Restore disks were downloaded by the reseller shop at the time the computer+license was in their possession!
Once the computer+license was sold, the restore disk went along with the computer+license.
There was simply no copyright infringement at all.
Thats ridiculous and not at all professional. He downloaded the software from dell, its their software. I would think the opposite, that they would have argued he was representing it as something he did by customizing the graphics, providing nfo or whatever. There is no reason why you shouldnt be able to make a physical copy, identical in every way to the original. To do less would be disingenuous and untrustworthy. Why can't he make exact copies, branding and all, that are binary equal (and visually identical) to files that dell releases on their website and indeed are originally included with the computer in the first place?
That would be easily verifiable by anyone who cared to audit it. He had a license and indeed a physical machine for each copy even! this is clear overreach by microsoft or dell or whomever.
-
...the hardware has to stay with the software.
Correct, OEM hardware cannot be sold without software rights. So the hardware was licensed.
This is mostly a trademark violation case. The OS restore disks this man burned had Microsoft and Dell logos. There's may be a small amount of copyright violation here - he burned OS restore images (available for free download from Dell's website), in anticipation of selling to eventual customers: PC refurbishment companies. If he already had an understanding with his customers to sell these disks to them, you could argue he acting an agent for them, in anticipation of custom. If so, this case boils down his violation of Microsoft and Dell trademarks.
The main problem is below:
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.
People who never refurbished PCs don't understand this. This is why I have a collection of ISOs of all Windows Versions (XP,Vista,7 - Pro/Home - 32/64bit - different OEMS) that I could get my hands on. I used to be a dumpster diver, you see. That collection has served me well, but it is far from complete. Some manufacturers are helpful. For a HP ProBook 4340S, it is possible to download a 4GB "Windows 7 restore disk", which actually works on that machine. They don't do this for every model, though, but I was surprised they actually did it for select (business) models. For Lenovo, I found you need to buy restore disks, and I've never seen one in real life. Dell seems to be the easiest one to get.
From my experience the Dell ones, actually work on most OEM machines. You need to type in the backup key on the case because it does detect it's not a Dell. It's it's a Dell it uses the SLP license instead of the sticker license. At least for Windows 7, this was true, I can't say for 8 or 10, but both of those can be downloaded directly from Microsoft and those use the key embedded in the firmware or the digital entitlement. So, there has been improvement. Once upon a time Windows 7 ISOs were also downloadable from Digital River, but, contrary to what many people think, those would only work for retail keys. OEM keys would not activate, and it stated as such on the website. It's a shame they stopped providing those.
Using a Dell restore disk on a HP (for example) is weird, though because you end up with a Dell branded Windows, which might raise questions if you try to sell it. (I mostly do this stuff for free, and for friends and family only)
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
License was paid for by OEM to sell with the computer. The guy has the computer and the license belongs to the machine.
No, he doesn't have the computer. Even if he did, it doesn't give him the right to sell copies of disks.
I don't actually know or care about the law.
Then you have no place in society, other than behind bars.
I use morality.
So did Dahmer. The problem with "morality" is that it's entirely personal.
The OEM sticker licenses can only be used on one computer.
No.. Not in non-3rdworld countries. EULAs are not legally binding and can be ignored. The only hinderance is local copyright, but if you don't copy the restore disk and just use it to move the installation, you have to have a pretty corrupt legal system to be breaking any laws.
> Why should there be ANY cost attached when the computer already has a legitimate license that has already been paid in full?
In most cases like this, Windows has an enterprise-licensed copy of windows that's bound to both the original computer AND licensee & can't be transferred to another user, EVEN IF it's the original installation with the original hard drive.
If Windows is installed from a literal retail-licensed copy of Windows, you can officially reuse the license on new computers in perpetuity, as long as you practice strict "serial monogamy" & never have multiple computers capable of using that license at any one time (and especially never have 2+ computers using the same license online simultaneously -- the BIG "no-no" that Microsoft notices). In practice, VERY FEW actual retail-licensed copies of Windows exist because they're SO EXPENSIVE compared to OEM-licensed copies.
In theory, a business could buy & resell retail windows licenses, but it would be legal suicide since you (the reseller) could never truly guarantee the seller actually complied with the terms & destroyed all other copies & installations of it.
OEM-licensed Windows is black & white on paper, but gray & blurry in practice. Officially, if a computer is sold by an official volume reseller like Dell with Windows, it's unambiguously legal to reinstall windows from the original hard drive recovery image using the original serial... but in practice, the original hard drive is usually long gone (or in a state whose integrity from malware can't be guaranteed). All other commercial resale scenarios probably violate Microsoft's licensing terms.
If you're an individual, Microsoft doesn't particularly care. They'll unofficially tolerate quite a few things that are officially forbidden. Reinstall an OEM copy of Windows on 3 or 4 different computers, and they're unlikely to do much beyond make you phone in to activate it (subtly letting you know, "We're watching you") as long as their servers never see a computer with an older-activated copy of that license online after you've activated it on a newer computer. ESPECIALLY if you're just using an old OEM copy to do a clean installation of Windows on a new computer that shipped with its own OEM license for the same version of Windows ANYWAY.
TL/DR: just because a once-valid Windows license code WORKS to (re)install Windows doesn't necessarily mean it's officially legit NOW in Microsoft's eyes... especially if you're doing it commercially and reselling computers.