4 ms·

That's a remarkably simple, upfront and honest apology. I'm not normally a big Microsoft fan, but it sounds like they're handling this one well. Go them!

icey 17y ago
Agreed, it was surprisingly PR-speak free. I'm glad to see that they mentioned who it was that was copied as well (Plurk).
- marcus 17y ago
  It was significantly easier for them because the transgression was done by an external contractor. I doubt they would have been this quick or this forthright had it been an internal job.
  - endtime 17y ago
    I highly doubt this would ever happen internally.
  - kprobst 17y ago
    Heysoos, the day they cure cancer someone will find a way to criticize them for it.
    - rbanffy 17y ago
      The day they cure cancer, it will probably be with an addictive drug ;-) They can't help it. It's their corporate DNA. I have a great deal of respect for many of their technical folks, but it's been ages since the MBAs and marketroids took control of the company. (sadly I miss the Tolkien quote I was trying to put in here about evil races... It's too early in the morning)
  - awa 17y ago
    Well, yes! But it would have been harder for an employee to do this since he would have been violating MS policies, hence risking his job. Also, The whole thing would have gone through a whole design process involving a PM and a Test, I doubt the 3 would have come to the same design decision (visual + architectural) as Plurk. Also, if the three decided to steal the code than it would have been three people risking their jobs instead of a vendor who was hoping "nobody would notice" esp since Plurk wasn't available from China.
    - rbanffy 17y ago
      "Also, The whole thing would have gone through a whole design process involving a PM and a Test" They would copy Plurk, but they would copy 2009's Plurk with a product that would enter beta in 2012...
  - pkulak 17y ago
    And if Ballmer murdered someone, that would have been harder to apologize for as well.
    - netcan 17y ago
      There is a point to the above comment. If it is easier to apologise & easier to be forgiven for vendor shoddiness, it creates an incentive to outsource dirty work.
      - jonny_noog 17y ago
        Sure does. See the use of mercenaries in Iraq and other places.
  - netcan 17y ago
    Why all the downvotes? It's true. It is easier having to apologise for a bad vendor then for a bad department. "The vendor has now acknowledged that a portion of the code they provided was indeed copied. This was in clear violation of the vendor’s contract with the MSN China joint venture, and equally inconsistent with Microsoft’s policies respecting intellectual property." That would have been a lot harder if it had been a Microsoft team.
ilamont 17y ago
Cool that they acted on it so quickly, but it makes me wonder what sort of controls are in place in China, and who is overseeing these sorts of projects. It's hard to believe someone who was familiar with the competition would green-light an obvious rip-off ... unless they weren't aware of Plurk or didn't care.
- mechanical_fish 17y ago
  On odd-numbered days people accuse companies the size of Microsoft of being stodgy, plodding, and bureaucratic, unable to ship anything in less than five years because of all the meetings and safeguards and red tape. On even-numbered days people accuse companies like Microsoft of not having enough meetings and safeguards. How could they green-light some contractor's code without triple-checking it against all the potential competitors on the web? Maybe consulting an IP lawyer. Maybe hold up the release of the code for three or four months, just to be sure. Get the CEO to sign off on it. The moral is: Microsoft is sometimes good, and Microsoft is sometimes bad, but Microsoft will always be criticized. In this case it looks to me like they did the right thing. They hired a contractor. They gave the contractor the power to get things done without constant handholding. In return, they made the contractor pledge in writing to uphold certain standards. Now the contract has been violated, and Microsoft took immediate action, and this press release is part of the result. It looks so innocent, but what it says is this: These contractors have failed us for the last time. Now witness the awesome destructive power of our legal team. You can't go through life constantly triple-checking everything. That's what contracts and insurance are for.
  - ilamont 17y ago
    "On odd-numbered days people accuse companies the size of Microsoft of being stodgy, plodding, and bureaucratic, unable to ship anything in less than five years because of all the meetings and safeguards and red tape." There's a Chinese idiom for organizations like Microsoft: "The Big Tree Catches The Wind." Because of their size and history, the company gets called on things that smaller companies never do. And yes, kudos to them for farming out the job to someone else, and giving the contractor to do work without constant handholding. But shame on them for not catching this blatant ripoff of a well-known competitor before launching this to the PRC market. The Plurk clone is not something the legal team should have triple-checked. It's something the China microblog product manager should have spotted on when mockups and specs were passed around.
brown9-2 17y ago
I agree, but perhaps I'm missing something - are they actually saying anywhere in that statement that they are cutting ties with the vendor that copied the code? It seems as if they are only saying they will be suspending the beta of this application and re-evaluating their practices towards application code supplied by third-party vendors.
- s3graham 17y ago
  WAG: It's pretty much a given, and they'll be throwing down some hurt for violation of contract terms too.
- anigbrowl 17y ago
  That was the impression I got, although we have to consider the possibility that it was one overworked or lazy programmer at a company that does multiple other projects. Anyway, props for the straight-up mea culpa.
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    Actually, it was more like an eius culpa...
caffeine 17y ago
They are handling this one well ... but try not to give them too much credit. After all, they did just manage to release a literal ripoff of a competitor's site under the MS brand name. Judging by the gushing applause for their apology, we were all half-expecting them to sue Plurk for libel, possibly having the devs shipped to Guantanamo for questioning. It feels a bit like the nervous, giggling thanks the schoolyard bully gets when he abstains, today, from stepping on the scrawny kid's glasses.

icey 17y ago

Agreed, it was surprisingly PR-speak free. I'm glad to see that they mentioned who it was that was copied as well (Plurk).

marcus 17y ago
It was significantly easier for them because the transgression was done by an external contractor. I doubt they would have been this quick or this forthright had it been an internal job.
- endtime 17y ago
  I highly doubt this would ever happen internally.
- kprobst 17y ago
  Heysoos, the day they cure cancer someone will find a way to criticize them for it.
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    The day they cure cancer, it will probably be with an addictive drug ;-) They can't help it. It's their corporate DNA. I have a great deal of respect for many of their technical folks, but it's been ages since the MBAs and marketroids took control of the company. (sadly I miss the Tolkien quote I was trying to put in here about evil races... It's too early in the morning)
- awa 17y ago
  Well, yes! But it would have been harder for an employee to do this since he would have been violating MS policies, hence risking his job. Also, The whole thing would have gone through a whole design process involving a PM and a Test, I doubt the 3 would have come to the same design decision (visual + architectural) as Plurk. Also, if the three decided to steal the code than it would have been three people risking their jobs instead of a vendor who was hoping "nobody would notice" esp since Plurk wasn't available from China.
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    "Also, The whole thing would have gone through a whole design process involving a PM and a Test" They would copy Plurk, but they would copy 2009's Plurk with a product that would enter beta in 2012...
- pkulak 17y ago
  And if Ballmer murdered someone, that would have been harder to apologize for as well.
  - netcan 17y ago
    There is a point to the above comment. If it is easier to apologise & easier to be forgiven for vendor shoddiness, it creates an incentive to outsource dirty work.
    - jonny_noog 17y ago
      Sure does. See the use of mercenaries in Iraq and other places.
- netcan 17y ago
  Why all the downvotes? It's true. It is easier having to apologise for a bad vendor then for a bad department. "The vendor has now acknowledged that a portion of the code they provided was indeed copied. This was in clear violation of the vendor’s contract with the MSN China joint venture, and equally inconsistent with Microsoft’s policies respecting intellectual property." That would have been a lot harder if it had been a Microsoft team.

ilamont 17y ago

Cool that they acted on it so quickly, but it makes me wonder what sort of controls are in place in China, and who is overseeing these sorts of projects. It's hard to believe someone who was familiar with the competition would green-light an obvious rip-off ... unless they weren't aware of Plurk or didn't care.

mechanical_fish 17y ago
On odd-numbered days people accuse companies the size of Microsoft of being stodgy, plodding, and bureaucratic, unable to ship anything in less than five years because of all the meetings and safeguards and red tape. On even-numbered days people accuse companies like Microsoft of not having enough meetings and safeguards. How could they green-light some contractor's code without triple-checking it against all the potential competitors on the web? Maybe consulting an IP lawyer. Maybe hold up the release of the code for three or four months, just to be sure. Get the CEO to sign off on it. The moral is: Microsoft is sometimes good, and Microsoft is sometimes bad, but Microsoft will always be criticized. In this case it looks to me like they did the right thing. They hired a contractor. They gave the contractor the power to get things done without constant handholding. In return, they made the contractor pledge in writing to uphold certain standards. Now the contract has been violated, and Microsoft took immediate action, and this press release is part of the result. It looks so innocent, but what it says is this: These contractors have failed us for the last time. Now witness the awesome destructive power of our legal team. You can't go through life constantly triple-checking everything. That's what contracts and insurance are for.
- ilamont 17y ago
  "On odd-numbered days people accuse companies the size of Microsoft of being stodgy, plodding, and bureaucratic, unable to ship anything in less than five years because of all the meetings and safeguards and red tape." There's a Chinese idiom for organizations like Microsoft: "The Big Tree Catches The Wind." Because of their size and history, the company gets called on things that smaller companies never do. And yes, kudos to them for farming out the job to someone else, and giving the contractor to do work without constant handholding. But shame on them for not catching this blatant ripoff of a well-known competitor before launching this to the PRC market. The Plurk clone is not something the legal team should have triple-checked. It's something the China microblog product manager should have spotted on when mockups and specs were passed around.

brown9-2 17y ago

I agree, but perhaps I'm missing something - are they actually saying anywhere in that statement that they are cutting ties with the vendor that copied the code? It seems as if they are only saying they will be suspending the beta of this application and re-evaluating their practices towards application code supplied by third-party vendors.

s3graham 17y ago
WAG: It's pretty much a given, and they'll be throwing down some hurt for violation of contract terms too.
anigbrowl 17y ago
That was the impression I got, although we have to consider the possibility that it was one overworked or lazy programmer at a company that does multiple other projects. Anyway, props for the straight-up mea culpa.
- rbanffy 17y ago
  Actually, it was more like an eius culpa...

caffeine 17y ago

They are handling this one well ... but try not to give them too much credit. After all, they did just manage to release a literal ripoff of a competitor's site under the MS brand name. Judging by the gushing applause for their apology, we were all half-expecting them to sue Plurk for libel, possibly having the devs shipped to Guantanamo for questioning. It feels a bit like the nervous, giggling thanks the schoolyard bully gets when he abstains, today, from stepping on the scrawny kid's glasses.