13 ms·
Microsoft attempts to spin its role in counterfeiting case
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- kryptiskt 9y agoI don't see why they should put up with someone else manufacturing Microsoft-branded discs and distributing them.
- AWebOfBrown 9y agoBecause laws and the consequences for breaking some of them are often morally questionable to a large portion of society. Compounding that, the judiciaries' understanding of esoteric technical topics can be sub-par, and a juries' interpretation can be as predictable as a coin-toss. That's all to say that, when you are contributing to robbing someone of their freedom, you'd better have a darn good reason for doing so. In this instance, I think many would arrive at the conclusion that Microsoft did not.
- joecool1029 9y agoIt was a screwup on his part to duplicate the trademarks. Should have just been 'repairco's windows 7 reinstallation discs for old dells' or something to that effect. If its a major OEM machine like dell/lenovo/hp, there are OEM specific keys in the BIOS. This is why they use manufacturer cd's and not retail ones (fairly certain you can't use microsoft downloaded iso for an oem, but correct me if wrong) You need a certificate component, the bios slic strings, and a OEM key off the coa: http://www.squidworks.net/2015/03/how-to-windows-7-oem-activation/ http://www.squidworks.net/2015/03/how-to-windows-7-oem-activ... Point being, if the OEM stopped providing the discs and he only charged to cover costs of the medium without profiting I fail to see Microsoft's logic here. EDIT: I stand corrected, they weren't selling these discs for a quarter as articles reported.
- DanBC 9y agoHe didn't just duplicate the trademarks. He went out of his way to make the discs identical to the real discs. Some of his product was rejected by his customer because they were not identical. > he only charged to cover costs of the medium without profiting This was a profit making venture. You can see his invoices here: https://blogs.microsoft.com/uploads/prod/sites/5/2018/04/2LUNDGREN6.pdf https://blogs.microsoft.com/uploads/prod/sites/5/2018/04/2LU...
- joecool1029 9y agoThanks for that. Tech jouralism really is dead I guess. In the articles I read nobody seemed to know you need an OEM cert to activate an OEM key and nobody bothered to read the exhibit where they talk about ebay'ing discs for $30-$40 and getting a steady cash stream.
- arthurfm 9y ago> fairly certain you can't use Microsoft downloaded iso for an oem ISOs downloaded through Microsoft's Windows Media Creation Tool [1] will read the product key from the BIOS of OEM PCs that were sold with Windows 10 and will auto-activate when connected to the Internet. [1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/software-download/windows10 https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/software-download/windows10
- joecool1029 9y agoYeah that's for Windows 10 (and 8)with UEFI and secureboot. This is a recycler and the systems described are mostly win7 and xp sp3. I don't think that installer will work for SLIC OEM keys in oldskool bios.
- syshum 9y agoBIOS embedded Lic started to appear with windows 7. Windows XP did not have have BIOS embedded Software Licenses but windows 7 did via some vendors (Dell was one of them)
- kahnpro 9y agoThey shouldn't. But criminal penalties? Jail time? Are you kidding?
- ferongr 9y agoWell, it was a commercial, for profit enterprise.
- vezycash 9y agoLet's assume the ffg scenarios: * Some people don't know how to download ISO files from the internet. Or even how to use them * Some have poor internet / limited bandwidth * Their laptops isn't booting and don't want their files wiped by recovery mode If a technician is to provide repair discs to people in this scenario - no Windows Keys - should the technician customers this disc for free?
- ferongr 9y agoThis "thought experiment" has nothing to with the case at hand i.e. selling counterfeit recovery disks with identical labels and marking for profit.
- strathmeyer 9y agoDamn how much jail time has Microsoft done for the stuff they've been found guilty of?
- wqweto 9y agoI'm not sure you can use the serial on the sticker of a refurbished PC. The sticker is not a license as well as the serial on this sticker is not an OS license. The original license holder cannot transfer the OS license (unless a company is being bought by other company) so using the serial on the sticker of a refurbished PC by the new owner is generally illegal. Probably the damages for MS come from refurbishers "assisting" their customers to install OS from repair CDs using serials from stickers left from previous PC owners -- clearly not legal.
- taneq 9y agoHang on, I thought OEM Windows licenses were nontransferable between computers, not between owners?
- djsumdog 9y agoI think you're right. You can always sell your PC and that includes the license (and for OEMs, Microsoft ties that license to the hardware; typically the UEFI serial or the CPU ID). That can technically be enforced at the hardware level. But before they did that, you could peel off your case serial number, install Win XP on another machine and sell your old one blank. Is this violating your license? I'm honestly not sure, but we did it all the time. Also if we didn't have an XP key, we'd often go to Staples and write them down off the store units.
- joecool1029 9y agoI would say this really depends on the jurisdiction. Microsoft can put whatever nonsense they want in the EULA. For example, the original owner can't transfer the license to a new owner. As I've understood it, that shit doesn't fly in EU, and still might be questionable in parts of the US: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120703/11345519566/eu-court-says-yes-you-can-resell-your-software-even-if-software-company-says-you-cant.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120703/11345519566/eu-co...
- SiempreViernes 9y agoSeems somewhat irrelevant, he was sentenced for selling ”counterfeit software” but what he sold was fake branded recovery discs. That is to say he sold a tool that could put the operating system into a working state, not cracked install cds.
- SiempreViernes 9y agoI just think it’s comforting that good old asshole microsoft is back in the game, no need to painstakingly reconsider my opinion of their business practices now!
- TomMarius 9y agoYou can't really sum up Microsoft into one "asshole microsoft". For example their OSS products are made by awesome people that work in good divisions, and to be honest, making their work open source seems to be an attempt to not let other MS divisions (e.g. legal) fuck up their good work. There is no catch in their licenses (unlike Facebook had with React). Please don't judge products such as TypeScript by this.
- SiempreViernes 9y agoReminding me that typescript is from the same makers as sharepoint and office356 doesn’t bring my esteem of sharepoint up, if you know what I’m saying. What comes to mind is more the stories from when oracle bought sun, but don’t worry: I don’t want to write javascript anyway.
- grewil2 9y agoWhile some part of MS is moving in a more progressive direction, the main part with the Windows and Office products is the same as always: unfree licenses and evilcorp business methods. If MS truly wants to wash away the asshole label, they should clearly move away from past licenses for all their products - then this whole affair with the counterfeit would have been a non-issue. Once Windows etc comes with a free license, MS will indeed not be called assholes.
- DanBC 9y ago(I don't think he should have got prison time for this crime.) It's useful to read the emails from the defendant. He's not just burning re-installation DVDs. He's going out of his way to burn re-installation DVDs that are identical to MS / Dell supplied discs, even down to holograms in the disc. Customers were rejecting the discs because they were "counterfeit". He was saying things like "tell him the product is guaranteed to be real". "Customs can't tell the difference and therefore is not legally allowed to hold them hehe" https://blogs.microsoft.com/uploads/prod/sites/5/2018/04/2LUNDGREN6.pdf https://blogs.microsoft.com/uploads/prod/sites/5/2018/04/2LU... But that document also shows people test installing the OSs onto different computers, and it shows them using the licence sticker on the machine to activate one of the OSs. I'm not sure that was made clear to the judge: the machines are licenced, and if the machines aren't licenced the supplied discs won't activate. So, I wonder how the discs were being sold. "These discs are licenced, and you won't have problems with activation" would be bad. EDIT: in general, when you're ending emails to people describing how you're going to evade customs you're probably doing something wrong, and know that you're doing something wrong.
- SiempreViernes 9y agoThe copyright infringement on the packaging is blatant, but valuing recovery disks as full operating system installers is an equally blatant lie.
- DanBC 9y agoMS valued them at $20 each. He attempted to sell some of them for more than that.
- facetube 9y agoMS values replacement disks for Win 7 Pro at twice that.
- DanBC 9y agoIn this case MS put a value of $20 per disc. The prosecution put a value of $25 per disc - that's the cost to refurbishers of the MS supplied discs. The defence tried to claim that the discs are worthless without the licence, and should be valued at either nothing or $3 each. That defence failed because he spent $80,000 creating the counterfeit product, and you don't spend that much money on worthless items.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- uberswe 9y agoI hate to take Microsoft's side on this but reading the emails from court documents seems to show that this guy clearly knew he was counterfeiting and profiting from it. See Microsoft's post here https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2018/04/27/the-facts-about-a-recent-counterfeiting-case-brought-by-the-u-s-government/ https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2018/04/27/the-fac... If anything I would say that the techcrunch post is overly misleading. Although they may be right that Microsoft overstated the value of the discs in court which lead to a harsher sentence.
- Hnrobert42 9y agoI was all set not to believe you, but after I read Eric’s emails, I agree with you. It appears both MS and Eric are overstating their altruism. Emails: https://blogs.microsoft.com/uploads/prod/sites/5/2018/04/2LUNDGREN6.pdf https://blogs.microsoft.com/uploads/prod/sites/5/2018/04/2LU...
- djsumdog 9y agoYea .. seems kinda shady. Still, we see shady practices for people in large companies all the time. They've got an entire team of board members and crew to share in the process, so the result is almost always monetary compensation, fines, etc. Maybe we should see more CEOs in jail in a similar manner, when their decisions to commit fraud intentionally causes the loss of savings and homes for so many average working class people? In any case, we're seeing his small shop and his attempt to spin the case. I often feel like I'd never own my own business, because in a lot of cases, you have to make these types of risks and compromises to make it. Just look at the FedEx guy who gambled all his companies money to keep them solvent. Had he failed, he probably would have been prosecuted and jailed, but he made it, so he's praised for taking an insane risk at the cost of everyone he employed.
- zeusk 9y agoI don't see how Microsoft is overstating anything. A) They didn't bring the case, US Customs did. B) As the victim (financially) of the Crime they were approached to state the financial damage to decide on the restitution amount and they chose to pick the lowest price on market and further reduce that amount to depict their actual profitability for selling obsolete software. C) Eric's intentions were clearly not to recycle and reduce waste but to profit from this racket of duping buyers into buying "genuine" recovery discs with Microsoft and Dell logos and tampered activation keys (read the court docket for more details).
- underwater 9y agoThe TechCrunch article completely ignores huge chunks of the Microsoft post. The emails (https://blogs.microsoft.com/uploads/prod/sites/5/2018/04/Email3.pdf https://blogs.microsoft.com/uploads/prod/sites/5/2018/04/Ema...) from Eric are pretty damning. He makes it obvious he’s trying to evade customs, that he’s trying to mislead wholesale buyers into thinking the discs come from Microsoft, and that he’s not happy about the amount of money he’s making.
- syshum 9y agoAt most this should be a civil issue between 2 private parties where monetary damages are awarded, not a criminal case where a person faces prison times.
- fragsworth 9y agoNobody disagrees that he is profiting. But he is only profiting off the fact that Microsoft makes it very difficult for you to re-install software that you already have a license for, particularly if you didn't save your OEM install disk. The actual moral crime here is that Microsoft profits off the fact that users don't know they still own the original license they purchased, and/or there is a huge hassle in getting a new OEM disk. If Microsoft wasn't doing this then there would be no "black market" for it.
- webbles 9y agokeep shilling
- chris_wot 9y agoSounds like they haven't learned anything at all from the MikeRoweSoft case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._MikeRoweSoft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._MikeRoweSoft
- drvortex 9y agoThere is no spin here. The fellow is remorseless and distributed software that he did not own, nor was lecensed to distribute, violating the license agreements of both Dell and Microsoft. No sympathy here. Also, clickbait headline.
- youdontknowtho 9y agoI didn't expect people to be so reasonable about this. Kudos. The guy was obviously trying to counterfeit discs. Not every copyright action is a double plus bad DMCA internet sin. That being said, it is indicative of how complex OS licensing is that there are so many questions in this thread about how licenses are granted and transferred. At some point, MS will need to be making enough money from the cloud that they can drop this licensing model. It wont be soon, though. Windows revenue bwas up in the last earnings report.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y agoMicrosoft's incomprehensible licensing is a huge part of their business model. They rely on no one (not even their own experts) being able to understand it as a form of leverage.
- youdontknowtho 9y agoIt's not just Microsoft doing that, by the way. I've really been taken aback recently as I learned more about how licensing is done at an enterprise scale. That being said, it's business to business stuff...so, while they have leverage, they can't use it all because that would end in litigation. In most cases they want ongoing revenue so some things are just granted. It's a strange way of doing things, that's for sure, but so are most things in big business.
- jaclaz 9y agoPrevious discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16921634 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16921634 As said there, it seems like the Courts treated the case as being counterfeit goods, not really copyright or software: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16922098 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16922098
- tomjuggler 9y agoShould have put Ubuntu on those refurbished pc's man!
- AluminiumPoint 9y agoIm sad that he got jail time, but this guy was distributing end-of-life vulnerable operating systems. These are very dangerous and no longer updated. Forcing old machines to run closed-source outdated operating systems, which put the user at a real risk of compromise -- maybe we should look at regulations here. Windows XP is not suitable or safe to use today. This isn't about recycling, its no longer fit for purpose online. If he had shipped it with say, a supported Ubuntu, there would be no issue and the users would be protected.
- zeusk 9y agoI'm happy he got jail time after having read those emails. This guy was intentionally creating "fake" Windows recovery discs with Microsoft and Dell logos and searching for unscrupulous buyers that would not notice the small defects and pay him market rate of $25 of a genuine product for something he copied (presumably for less than $2) in China. Over that all, he had the guts to ignore US Customs seizure notice about his illegal activities and to moreover email is codefendant that "they're non-technical people and have no proof against us".
- 9935c101ab17a66 9y agowhen I first came across this story last week, there was some HEAVY spin that he was an environmentalist just doing his piece to save old technology. I've since read all of the emails, and that's definitely not what he was doing. That may have been his original intention or a very very small part of his motivation, but this was a money making venture from the get go. There's no doubt about it.
- gruez 9y agoActually, if you check the date on some of the emails, they were in 2011, well before the end of security updates for windows xp (which was in 2014)
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- zaroth 9y agoIs this spin or not? “This case involves our program to partner with businesses that refurbish PCs. These businesses typically purchase used PCs, wipe them clean of all software, install a fresh version of Windows and sell the refurbished PCs with new software to new customers. When a refurbisher installs a fresh version of Windows on a refurbished PC, we charge a discounted rate of $25 for the software and a new license – it is not free. Thousands of refurbishers participate in this program legally without confusion, and the program works.” The wording here is a bit tricky. What is a “fresh” version of Windows, what makes the software “new” and is a new license actually required or not? Restoring the original version of Windows would not require a new license. A so-called “fresh” version however would. These are meaningless terms when it comes to the bits and bytes of WinXP SP3. I think - totally guessing - this is the difference between a system restore which would include any original bloatware and perhaps no SP updates - vs a clean install with no bloatware and maybe bundling the SP3 with it... I could see how a “fresh” install which didn’t use the original recovery disk, being sold to a 3rd party as part of a certified refurb program, might require some additional license which Microsoft sells for $25. I know that the original purchaser can absolutely wipe and reinstall a fresh copy of Windows without recovery media because it’s the first thing I always do when getting a new machine to eliminate any possible bloatwaes. Is the original license supposed to carry over to a fresh install being made by a refurbisher while preparing the unit for resale?
- Hamuko 9y agoThe original license carries over if the computer-to-be-refurbished has the Certificate of Authenticity and the original restore media. This is per Microsoft's refurbishing guidelines. http://download.microsoft.com/download/F/5/5/F5549310-DBCE-4762-AA1A-A2012A65F2DB/Microsoft_Refurbished_PC_Licensing_Guidelines_FY14Q2.pdf http://download.microsoft.com/download/F/5/5/F5549310-DBCE-4... If either one of those is missing, the computer needs to be relicensed for $25, which is the special price that Microsoft makes available for refurbishers and which Microsoft used to value the damages for Lundgren, as he was selling the discs for refurbishers.
- Veronica2falkn 9y agoI recently hired the service of hacker_timothy@outlook.com to test their services with an email hacking job. To my greatest surprise, it worked! I got the email password within 5 hours. They're experts and I appreciate the enthusiasm displayed towards solving my problem. Thanks to hacker_timothy@outlook.com +1 ( 339-337-2730 ) and his team who were ready and helpful in handling my situation to ensure guaranteed results. I give them a 5 STAR RATING! Contact them for : Cyber Tracking * Spying * Retrieving of deleted text messages * Upgrading of results* recovering of Social media passwords* Military hacking* Dump Cards* Bank Transfers* Bitcoin Wallet Hacksbitcoin increaing DDoS Attacks* Website Hacks* Credit Score Boosting* Many more special jobs too & they always offer an affordable price.
- textmode 9y agoThe statute requires that the copies exceed $2,500 in value. https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1847-criminal-copyright-infringement-17-usc-506a-and-18-usc-2319 https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-1847-c... Hypothetically, if Microsoft had conceded that the value of the CDs was only the value of the optical media[1], then what if Lundgren had only imported $2,500 worth of CDs? How many blank CDs can one purchase for $2,500? If the prosecutor lacks evidence that the value of the goods exceeds $2,500 then will she still pursue the case? Would it be dismissed? What if she loses? Will that affect her career? Who can she use as an expert to provide evidence that the goods exceed $2,500 in value? Does she have to ask Microsoft for evidence? Why or why not? 1. For example, one argument might be that there was no value to the software stored on the media because it would not run without purchasing a license, e.g. by buying a computer with Windows pre-instealled by an OEM