I said it before, I'll say it again: It has nothing to do with piracy!

Before CD-RW, CDs were not crackable, and the price never went down, it went up. Now the CD companies are crying piracy, and they will sue anyone and anything. Never mind the fact that CD sails have gone way, way up, now they are having all these losses. Contrary to what the piracy paranoid are saying, the cost will never drop, it will just expand and be filled, like memory and disk space.

Companies - especially monopolies - will always inflate their losses and cry wolf, even when they get what they want. It just lets them raise their prices.

What about the so called firewall - made by M$ - can you trust it? Absolutely Not! It will let activation and upgrades take place. And guess what! Those upgrades can be Deactivation-Upgrades. An upgrade to disable your software, how do you like the sound of that? They already have done this.

Activation will produce artificial scarcity of existing, legal software. This will force you to upgrade when support is dropped for XP, when you exhaust your activation limit, or when they snap their fingers - which will gradually grow more frequent - if we ever let them get away with this invasion of privacy.

Why would anyone trust a company that everything they say is ass-backwards, like how they are saying they want to be the center of all biometrics information, so that the customer can have a choice and be empowered as to how their personal information is being used. Or how killing Netscape or being a bigger monopoly is what the customer wants, because the customer wants free stuff, but windows comes with practically nothing of use, except things they are trying to kill and monopolize (how about a better WordPad or security?) But now Linux is the 'Communist' because it is 'free'. M$ won't even admit that they ever did anything wrong, ever, or that they ever could.

The fact is, the people at M$ are not trustworthy and they have proven it time and time again. Yet, they say we are the criminals that need to be stopped. Any legitimate complaint just points to the so called 'fact' that we are all "conspiracy theorists" and anyone standing in bill's way, is a "communists."

I think I know who is the "Paranoid conspiracy theorist."

And to the people who say we need this because look at how everyone is responding.

"All through time Kings, Priests and Rulers have tried to force slaves to work. But the Slaves always find a way to sabotage the aims of the Ruler. That the more you abuse and oppress your slaves the *POORER* their 'production' towards your goals."

It always boggles my mind that someone is willing to be $3000 for a new PC, but considers spending a few hundred dollars for the OS to be absurd. Piracy is a problem for every software company. Microsoft is the world leader in software. Of course Microsoft is going to try different ways to save their investment. Is activation the best way solution to piracy? Maybe, maybe not. Only time will tell.

You state "...if we ever let them get away with this invasion of privacy." How is software activation an invasion of your privacy? Computer Associates has had software activation in their backup software for years, yet has anyone complained about it? Sure, it's seems to be an annoyance, but you do take a few minutes to call and read off some numbers and you are done.

You continue stating things like "Yet, they say we are the criminals that need to be stopped". Yes, people who are making a complete profit by forging Microsoft software should be stopped. Is it legal to counterfeit money? Then why should it be legal to counterfeit software?

Ever notice people who write open software also have full time jobs? Think about that.

Personally, I think you are little bitter knowing it is going to be harder to pirate Microsoft software.

That I don't pirate software aside, M$ said "The crack will be out in a week." Why would I be upset if I want to pirate the ware? I already can without a crack: The multi user license.

If anything is absurd, it is that in the year 2020, I will have no OS to run my old win32 apps that I paid hard earned cash for because the OS and software will have evaporated. The threshold for activation will have been expired, and the Activation servers will be gone - along with M$. And I can just throw out my hardware with each forced upgrade because the OS wont run without eight-billion gigs of ram to load the windows kernel.

Today I shell out hundreds on books and Linux because this is the last straw. The Lies and FUD are also fueling my switch. M$ is worse than the cigarette companies spending billions on Astroturf instead of good, safe products.

WPA is not to save an investment, its to produce artificial scarcity of existing, legal software, forcing you to upgrade and have to buy it again. This is shareware, spyware.

Who would want to buy something, then be forced to buy it again, and again, then be forced to upgrade - OS and hardware - when they refuse to support XP.

> "Is activation the best way solution to piracy?"

It is not a solution to piracy. It has nothing to do with piracy and everything to do with data mining and making a commodity self-destruct.

The dongle is a solution that would stop piracy and not invade privacy. If I need to upgrade, I can take my dongle with me. I can even install my OS on any computer that I want so long as I use only one of them at a time because I only have the one dongle. Moreover, the dongle does nothing but sit there. There is no overhead, no phone home, no de-activation, no inventory of stuff that doesn't belong to the dongle or M$ but the software and dongle it self, all in the security and privacy of my own home, like the sixth amendment says.

If M$ was going to use dongles, I wouldn't like it because they are not perfect in terms of fair use, but at least I would know they were not lying to me as to what their really doing. It would be an almost reasonable hoop to jumpe through. But I would prefer they do that with the Software and not the OS because I need the OS to run without too many hoops to jump through.

> "You state "...if we ever let them get away with this invasion of privacy." How is software activation an invasion of your privacy? Computer Associates has had software activation in their backup software for years, yet has anyone complained about it?"

Yes, they have, and I (and many) don't use their software because of this. However, windows is not a piece of software, it is an OS that is required to run your computer as well as your software. Windows is also an illegal monopoly that has abused its monopoly status while tying services that cause harm to the consumer, that includes activation.

There is no choice in the matter. M$ is already on 95% of the desktops and everyone learned how to use M$ by muddling through. Just like an infectious parasite, M$ releases the payload when they have populated the host sufficiently so as to over power his immune system with the toxin. Not knowing the toxin in advance, the immune system can't develop a resistance. Switching to Linux or Apple would cost lots of money and wouldn't happen over night. Only the strongest will survive, the week will die.

> You continue stating things like "Yet, they say we are the criminals that need to be stopped." Yes, people who are making a complete profit by forging Microsoft software should be stopped. Is it legal to counterfeiting money?

"Then why should it be legal to counterfeit software?"

Bending what I say again!

So then you are saying (repeatedly) that all legitimate computer users are criminals automatically, hence the mandatory ass-rapes. The hypocrisy that you didn't listen to, is that M$ is the one who is breaking the law along with violating the sixth amendment.

Now, How can forcing only legitimate software owners to an unlawful search and seizure of software and hardware be anything other than an invasion of privacy. If I say this has ZERO benefit to me and a hindrance, then how does that equate to me counterfeiting money and software? You just keep preaching and preaching all this FUD to wash away the facts that I present.

> "Ever notice people who write open software..."

So then, I don't like my privacy invaded because I'm not a criminal and as a power user, I upgrade and format frequently and don't like spyware/self-destructing software, and somehow this equates to me thinking that all software on earth has to be free. Are you going to call me a communist next like CPUGuy does to anyone who questions M$???

"Ever notice" Astroturf just makes people angry at the fact that M$ will never ever admit they are wrong. And "Ever notice" movies take billions to make, but they sell for 10-20$ and they don't erase themselves after 6 viewing or require you to give fingerprint inventories of your hardware papers and effects. Or, "Ever notice" when you buy a TV, the manufacturer can't make it evaporate essentially forcing you to buy it again.

Out of the Eighty-Thousand Zero-User-Benefiting-Ways Activation will milk consumers every time M$ snaps their fingers, its a bit infuriating that the legitimate complaints get labeled as "Everybody is a wants-something-for-free Commie!"

Everyone I know is getting sick of it. I don't want something for free, I want something that I paid for. That's the way it usually works. You take my money, I take your product. M$ is taking more and more and not letting anyone else offer me anything so I have to only put up with all this taking and taking and now even more taking.

So they can make more money off of software with expiration dates, and force you to only use M$ ware when you find your update disabled you computer, QuickTime or some other restrictions that they will now be able to force you into compliance.

> "Personally, I think you are little bitter knowing it is going to be harder to pirate Microsoft software."

Yeah, I'm just so bitter because I can't pirate windows, Not because of the other things that I said. Its really Not: wrong, a violation of human rights, law, reason, fair use, search and seizure, and the exact problems I would have with My set up would just be so I can pirate from M$. I just said all those thing because I'm a communist. I'm also bitter when the cops search my house and belongings to make sure I'm not doing anything illegal... Wait a minute! Even the cops can't do that because of the Bill of Rights.

It is fortunate for all of us that we live in a democracy that has a set of rules Governing the fascist (6% of the population) and the mentally disturbed microsoft radical.

"I think you are little bitter knowing" that your company is going to die.

Microsoft is gulity of Human Rights violations now? LOL Your paranoia becomes more apparent with every post I read. Where do you come up with this crap?

yabba dabba doo

-Fred Flinstone

This activation crap that Microsoft is forcing on the public us really challenging crackers to break it. As soon as XP goes gold there will be cracks out and Microsoft wont be able to do anything except hope people will choose to "Dynamic update" during setup...

Crackers will no doubt respond to every WPA modification. But let's get real. There's no alturistic purpose behind their cracks. This isn't a "power to the people" "down with Mocrosoft" effort. They create S/N cracks, CD-check cracks, copy-protection cracks, you name it. Cracking WPA is just another feather they want to put it their collective hat.

Uh, altruistic. Duh.

I hate to tell ya guys, but it is extremely simple to get past Microsloth's all-powerful activaction scheme.. At least in the Beta2 version that I installed all you need to do is crash the computer, startup in safemode, open regedit, and change a key. Not exactly rocket science. It's easier to do that than to try to find a CD key online somewhere..

I'm familiar with earlier discussions about that key. Doesn't work on RC1.

This discussion is indicative of why WPA is necessary. Rather than be good citizens and pay for software, knowledgeable users would rather crack it (read "steal" it); This results in less monies being injected into the software industry. Some of you may say, "MS has enough money," but that's really not your call to make. I'm willing to bet that if WPA didn't exist the same people would find something else about Windows XP that they don't like and use that as justification for downloading it (Java, Windows Messenger, Media Player, etc.). From the articles (and responses) I've read on WPA, MS is trying to combat casual piracy. Frankly, I applaud them for this. How much money does Adobe (among others) lose due to copies of PS6.0 floating around on the net, not to mention Gnutella, Morpheuse and the like. This trickles down to the local level as well; MS partners, retail outlets, online retailers and more are hurt by pirating software.

If you think MS products are over-valued and over-rated, use something else. No one is forcing you to use their stuff. If I seem biased, put yourself in their shoes. You spend time, effort, money, etc. to create something only to have someone take issue with it and then proceed to steal it from you. Does is still seem justified to get the crack?

I was watching coverage of the O'Reilly OSCOn online and during the panel discussion a woman from Mozilla.org made the comment that MS has the ability to extract revenue stream from the market by bundling technologies into Windows. I would argue that by pirating any software, you do the same.

Not realy...i change video cards hard drives mem and other things weekly same with mother boards..i own a ton of computer stuff
my roommate and myself have prob 10 boxes 4 cable lines etc etc
we run windows only on one machine tho...But changeing things around tradeing with friends on gear...installing XP for us wont happen till theres a crack for it then we will buy 2 copys to set on the shelf
next to the 12 win98 3 win95 2 suse 7.0 1 open bsd and 348756876 aol disks we play skeet with...in reality the aol and other ppl who dont know computers will run from XP in the end think about it They cant check there e-mail w/o a huge cartoon shaped button This activation should realy confuse them ..MS is shooting them selfs by thinking all computer users are guilty

m0zone

how is it necessary? So Bill Gates can add more billions of dollars to the billions he already has? That guy has more money than you, me, and everyone else who has posted a comment to this article will make in a lifetime-combined. Whats pricay going to do to billyboy? Make him lose 3 billion dollars? Thats like you, me, and any other middle class person losing 50 cents. People have been pirating MS programs for such a long time that any more piracy wont effect them

It screws us, the consumer. Within the near future, I am planning on upgrading pretty much everything in my computer except the hard drives. That is a new motherboard, processor, video card, CD drives, ect. If I was to upgrade to XP (that is if I was on crack or some other dangerous drug) before I upgraded my hardware, I would then have to get permission from Microsoft to use thier damn product that I paid for just because I changed my hardware. Thats just as bad as having to get permission from your parents to go to the bathroom. Sure it would take just seconds on my cable modem, but that's not the point. The point is that I have to get permission to use the product I paid for. So, no, WPA is not necessary

'People have been pirating MS programs for such a long time that any more piracy wont effect them.'.....So it's 'OK' to pirate Microsoft software because you've decided that Bill Gates is rich enough? What about all the developers that do the actual development for Microsoft, are they rich enough too? Is it 'OK' to steal from your local music store if you've decided that the recording industry is rich enough?

I personally couldn't care less wether you pirate software or not, or who's software you pirate for that matter. But there's no reason to make up excuses like 'well he's rich' for why you think that what you are doing is 'OK' or legal or fair.

And you don't buy the product with software, you buy a license to run that software. If you are unhappy with the license, take it back and get your money back. If you were to upgrade to XP and then went through and changed everything in your computer, yes you would have to re-activate. That's how MS believes that they can limit?/lower? piracy.

If you purchase 3dsmax + a few commercial plugins (as an example) you will have to activate it plus each of those plugins. Let's say that you then for one reason or another have to re-install it, you'll have to go through the process of re-activating it plus all of the plugins. A pain in the ass? yes, but it's how Discreet believe that they can limit? piracy of their product.

Note that these are ways to limit?/lower? piracy, not to totally stop it - as that is obviously not possible.

Since Microsoft was conceived there have been no copyrights enforced. Microsoft made it's fortune on allowing DOS and Windows to be copied and now that everyone has stolen the software, they are basically trained in Windows. If a small or medium business is to be competitive they must use MS to avoid the costs of training.
When MS started, all the other software vendors were protecting their software like Lotus with a disk key, Novell with a serial number conflicting with any other network using it and more.
BY law, companies must make reasonable effort to protect their own copyright. MS has not done so. If you leave $50 on the side walk and expect nobody to take it, a police officer is not going to help you get it back.
The same should be true for Microsoft. They left the door open for over 10 years. Why do they deserve to own a copyright or have it enforced? Reasonable measures were taken by all the other software vendors so it was reasonable for MS to try. They did not even try.
Now a case could be made that the software is public domain and general practice to not enforce the copyright.
WPA will hurt MS sales even worse than W2000 has. MS announced that they will not support 2000 past the year 2002. Does this mean upgrade every 2 years or your business will die?

I agree; while we all know Microsoft (and Bill Gates) have more money than they will ever need, the simple fact is stealing is WRONG; a simple philosophy I pass on to my children. If you have not learned that by now....welll....don't blame your parents; blame yourself. There are alternatives to MS XP; use Linux for example. Don't want to pay for Office XP? StarOffice is available.

I agree; while we all know Microsoft (and Bill Gates) have more money than they will ever need, the simple fact is stealing is WRONG; a simple philosophy I pass on to my children. If you have not learned that by now....welll....don't blame your parents; blame yourself. There are alternatives to MS XP; use Linux for example. Don't want to pay for Office XP? StarOffice is available.

If you think someone making a rule or law makes your kids honest you have more problems than you know. It's up to you to teach them honesty, not the government or Microsoft or anyone else but you. You probably are not looking at the overhead that this will cause corporations in time to register, re-register and track individual computer usage of licenses. These companies have no problem paying for software but attaching the a 25 digit alphanumeric serial to every computer will triple costs. Remember to add this into the cost when you buy XP.

The simple fact of the matter is, if I own something, or create it, and someone tries to steal it, i would cut off their stupid hands. If M$ can't do that, then they have every right to curb stealing of their software however they see fit. As for the extra costs to corporations, TOUGH FRICKIN' NOOGIES! It's like a Lexus. Just because I can't afford it doesn't mean I should feel better about stealing one! If the company can't afford XP for everyone, then they can use something else, instead of paying what THEY feel is appropriate.

You really have no idea about how Corporate licenses work, do you? About CALs? About license inventories? WPA is a non-issue for corporations moving to XP.

If I buy a cd and play it on two different players and it is still in my possession and not copied or pirated. Why? Using your logic if I take a carburator out of my car and install it in an entirely different model - should I have to relicense the other car or relicense the carburator? Some rights go with ownership of a product. Like using it personally - if they make the disclaimer it can only be on one machine, and I agree, then fine. I won't buy it. Have you seen the problems people are having with the beta releases of this - let's talk reliable product. You buy a can of worms called a reliable product - the best since white bread and you can't use it to go fishing? Microsoft has gone the way of most software manufacturers in literally screwing the hand the feeds them. I am waiting to be fed something from them that isn't hoakum, then maybe I would respect their license. After all the errors and bugs from 95 that resulted in Millennium (which is still errors and bugs) and no reduced upgrade price or free replacement for a knowingly defective product - I think users should be the ones who file a class action for blowouts resulting in rollovers and blue death. And use something else? Hmm whatever happened to backward compatibility? Bigger, Better, Faster ain't all they told us it was cracked up to be, without my support and money - it won't happen. Watch the price come down when no one rushes out and buys a new monopolist microsoft machine just because it runs XP - think most of us have already upgraded the machine and are sitting tight on what we have.

You don't 'own' software in the same way that you 'own' your car and all the components that it is comprised of. Once again, when you buy software, you are buying a license to run that software, nothing more, nothing less, wether you like it or not. So comparing it to the kitchen sink and saying how unfair it is is completely irrelevant.

I dont own what I buy? Welllll, If I am leaseing, renting, or whatever you want to call it, Where's my contract? Where's the company Rep at the signing? Oh, thats right, Thier is no real contract. MS EULA may not even be a legal binding contract because, many parts are very grey and not defined very well by present business laws.

Where's the law's protecting consumers in these type of realitively new transactions? Thier's nothing conventional about MS's EULA's they skirt on very edges of the present laws. Very well done indeed. I think it's time to get a legal and fair contract from MS. Maybe the court precedings will shed some light on these subject's as well.

When the day comes that I pay a monthly, annual or yearly Fee's for a operating system is the day that i'll use QNX if i have to.

'wether you like it or not' ..... Did I not make that clear enough or something? I'd have put it in bold if I was allowed to but I cannot. So to try and make it a little more clear, NO you do NOT own what you buy when it comes to software or a large proportion of software.

Where's your contract, it's that huge chuck of text most of us have probably never read and instead clicked on 'OK' or 'continue' etc. that's shown when you start installing an application, and it'll also more than likely be included in the box you bought your software in. Now it is not limited to the EULA, there's various License Agreements out there.

'may not even be a legal binding contract'.....Someone who is a lawyer correct me if I'm wrong, since I am not a lawyer but I have studied contract law - at least in this country (AU). For a contract to be legally binding, two aspects have to be shown:
1. An Offer
2. An Acceptance

So, bring it back to the software you purchased - The Offer may be to allow you to run that software on just a single machine and the cost of doing that will be a one time payment of $xxx. To make that contract legally binding all you have to do is accept! Guess what you are doing when you click on 'OK'!

Now yes, you could argue this point till you're blue in the face, but that is contract law as I know it and therefore it definetely is legally binding. How well the EULA and other contracts will stand up in court is another matter and really depends on the judge and lawyers involved more than anything!

And I'm glad you'll use QNX, it's a fairly good RTOS, unfortunately you might have some problems getting applications for it.

Hmmm...I plant a flower in my garden in my front yard for the world to see - I paid the seed manufacturer - I did the work. A bee comes along and takes my pollen and makes honey at another location - should I sue or as the seed manufacturer own the intellectual properties as well as the nutritional on the honey? You walk by and look at my flower and ask for a seed. Hmmm? Now I am in trouble with the seed manufacturer. I take a seed and plant it someplace else in my yard. Hmmm...in trouble again. I know we aren't talking apples and oranges here...once I pay for a product that product is mine to use as I see fit. Fact - nothing a corporate giant says will alter that. I am the one who suffers it's affects - has it's benefits. Maybe they should either make a better product and charge more, lock it up if they want to...or pay me for all the ill affects of a cheap bug filled release in the guise of a quality product here. The issue is can I legally force a binding contract based on deception, lack of quality, and very frankly dog s***? Just because they paid good money for developing dog food doesn't mean I still don't clean up the s***.
Maybe the point is responsibility here. When they assume responsibility for what they produce...maybe I will respect their license. Till then hackers keep cracking the code.

I'll ignore responding to your garden example, it's not even remotely applicable here.

COPYRIGHT laws assigns exclusive rights to the copyright holder as to how and if the product is distributed. Bottom line, if MS says one copy to one machine only, the law is 100% behind that.

Sheesh.

That garbage they call an EULA IS NOT A CONTRACT, YOU DONT GET YOUR CONTRACT AFTER YOUR PURCHASE

You can whine all you want that you believe that that EULA isn't enforcable. That's swell. What you're ignoring is the FACT that Copyright Law, and the clarifications made by the Software Act make it perfectly clear that the software copyright holder has consider4 able control over how/when/if their software may be distributed and reproduced. Reproduction includes protection against installing the software on a second PC. A company may grant the user a license to install on multiple PCs. A user license may be more or less restrictive than the rights granted to the publisher by Copyright Law.

Your incessant "I bought it, it's mine!" belongs back in your pre-school class.

OK
MS is only looking after the users best interest.

MS is a god like enity.

MS should be allowed to write the laws as they see fit. That way they can look after the user's best interests.

MS has the only good products on the market. Why would you use anything else.

MS has never committed any illegal actions and if they did it was to benefit the user's not MS.

Elvis is alive and well at the remond campus.

I admit I'm twice your age if not more. Yes my views are backed with about 40+ years of eXPerience. If you yougsters dont wakeup, you will be sorry later. Seems to me the younger generations are used to lead around an a leash. Fine, be a follower rather than an leader, just dont complain late you got the shaft.

I noticed you failed to comment on this part of my post maybe you can shed some negative response on this section as well.

Where's the law's protecting consumers in these type of realitively new transactions? Thier's nothing conventional about MS's EULA's they skirt on very edges of the present laws. Very well done indeed. I think it's time to get a legal and fair contract from MS. Maybe the court precedings will shed some light on these subject's as well.

"not even remotely applicable here."

If you use the seeds to make an apple tree, are you infringing on the rights of the fruit company?

If it's a "Roundup Ready Apple" from Monsanto, then you're damn right that you would be infringing on the rights of the company! Just ask Percy Schmeisser, who was sued by Monsanto and is now on the hook to pay them a $19,000 judgment for growing "Roundup Ready Canola" (aka rapeseed) on his own fields using seed that apparently blew onto his land from passing trucks!
Now, today, Monsanto has announced that they are hauling yet another farmer into court.

http://sask.cbc.ca/cgi-b...07/20/monsantosue010720

And then there are some people who are genetically immune to AIDS or have birth defects that have been copyrighted. Needless to say, they were upset when they found out about it.

Scary, the idea that a living organism can be someone's "intellectual property".

By reading this you agree to be bound by this EULA. You will now kill yourself. Also, I need your kidneys, Mine are bad. Send them along with all your personal belongings.

"All your computers are belong to us. Because the license says so."

The consumer has certain rights that you can't write off in an EULA; such as fair use. Just because you write whatever you want to be the law into an EULA does not make it "The Law". It can be contested.

How about agreeing to something before you ever read it? How about killing someone? How about exclusionary contracts? How about tying services? How about preventing OEMs from installing Netscape?

Illegal Contracts are not legal.

Your "views" about the law IGNORE the law.

Look, here's a hint. You don't like WPA, alot of people don't like WPA. Hell, I don't like WPA. But you guys are arguing the wrong issues when you whine M$ is greedy, Bill had too much money, it's MINE I tell you MINE! It's a conspiracy! They're going to turn off
XP and FORCE me to upgrade! Nothing but FUD.

I must admit, I'm surprised to see you say that you're an ol'-timer. you seem to have avoided learning even a smattering of Copyright Law.

Just an aside: you're likely not all that older than me, sport. I ain't one of the kiddies. :-)

""not even remotely applicable here.""

"If you use the seeds to make an apple tree, are you infringing on the rights of the fruit company?"

The "example" that I was responding to was not dealing with seeds that were restricted in any sense. It's interesting to hear the story of Monsanto. Thanks.

"And then there are some people who are genetically immune to AIDS or have birth defects that have been copyrighted. Needless to say, they were upset when they found out about it."

You just wrote that these people have been copyrighted. I don't think that's what you meant. I'd be interested in a link to that story, though.

"By reading this you agree to be bound by this EULA. You will now kill yourself. Also, I need your kidneys, Mine are bad. Send them along with all your personal belongings."

This is the kind of stupid hyperbole that pretty much destroys an argument.

"All your computers are belong to us. Because the license says so."

See above.

"The consumer has certain rights that you can't write off in an EULA; such as fair use. Just because you write whatever you want to be the law into an EULA does not make it "The Law". It can be contested."

I'm sure consumers do. and yes, EULA's can be contested. A EULA isn't a "law," btw. I think the question you are proposing is can a EULA be contested as non-enforceable, either in part or in whole. Absolutely. I don't have any examples of EULA's being successfully contested though, do you?

"How about agreeing to something before you ever read it? How about killing someone? How about exclusionary contracts? How about tying services? How about preventing OEMs from installing Netscape?"

How about it?

"Illegal Contracts are not legal."

No? Really?. Contracts that have not been contested and proven illegal are, guess what? Still legal.

MS has had the one copy of an OS per computer for a hell of a long time and better men than you or I have never found their EULA to be unenforceable. Facts are hell. eh?

Sorry to be 'negative', I was trying to explain contract law as best I know it, in Australia at least - it may differ slightly/completely elsewhere. The reason I didn't respond to that paragraph of yours is simply because as I said I'm not a lawyer. I don't know the exact legal standing on everything in the EULA or any License Agreement for that matter. I don't think that any of them have been challanged in court. For example, most modern license agreements have an added clause saying you will not reverse-engineer their code, but I don't think anyone's been taken to court over using a crack. If they have then there is your answer right there.

If they haven't, then I don't know where that law is, it may be that the courts show that the EULA or some other License Agreement is not enforcable as a result of reasons A, B and C. I honestly do not know.

Hmm, not sure how you got to these conclusions after I mentioned that you don't own software but rather own a License to run that software.

'MS is only looking after the users best interest.'
No, MS is looking after it's own best interest, as is any successful company, especially any large corporation.

'MS is a god like enity.'
No, they're just large corporation who develop software (and about a million other things).

'MS should be allowed to write the laws as they see fit.'
Definetely not, they're (primarily) a software development company not law makers. Then again in this day and age and with the state of law in some countries, it seems like anyone with a bit of power can re-write the laws.

'MS has the only good products on the market.'
Definetely not. Adobe has great products, Numega has superb products (developer-centric), Rational has great products, Protel is a brilliant product etc etc. There are much better word processors than Word especially when you're dealing with really large files. If anything, MS has the 'most popular?' products on the market.

'MS has never committed any illegal actions and if they did it was to benefit the user's not MS.'
Everyone has committed some illegal action, if you're referring to the antitrust case(s) then yes they were even found guilty of it in court.

'Elvis is alive and well at the remond campus.'
This seems to be more of an American thing more that anything, so if you guys think Elvis is still alive - fine.

Oh, so I pay an arm and a leg for software and then I still dont own it?

And in the US, I doubt the EULA is a legal contract.

Alright, so if I say give me "1000 dollars or I'll kill you" in a contract and you dont give me the money and I kill you and tried to say that it was a contract as my defense at my trial, I would be lauged at and locked up for life. And the law wouldnt back my contract at all, so why should the law automatically backs MS's contract?

'Oh, so I pay an arm and a leg for software and then I still dont own it?'.....b**** ain't it!

'give me "1000 dollars or I'll kill you"'.....Is a threat not a contract. On the other hand, if you OFFER to pay someone $xxx to kill another person or even yourself, and they AGREE to that, then that is a legally binding contract.

The point is you are NOT paying an arm & a leg for the software. You are paying an arm & a leg for a LICENSE. Microsoft has never offered its software for sale. If you don't like the terms of the license, no one is forcing you to make that purchase. You are the biggest idiot I've ever encountered, and I have encountered MANY doing MS Windows 2000 tech support.

whatever. license, software. You pay an arm and a leg for whatever the hell you want to call it and then you still have MS watching everything you do with the OS

So now they are giving away a limited number of free copies - freight paid for. Seems they musy have paid for all those cd's at 10 a whack. I agree that contract terms are tpically negotiated before a contract is "signed" (keyword). Verbal contracts are as binding as state laws allow - think even Wyoming - last place on God's earth they applied even did away with them - too many unscrupulous people out there with promises (hmm monopoly case?). An electronic signature - hmmm guess the courts need to see on that one. Think if some kids out here check contractual law - you would find you are being hoodwinked into thinking the emperor has new clothes. But then you don't understand fairytales - guess they don't teach things like that in school anymore - non diverse as they are. To do this in the guise of fighting piracy is absurd. They will ask 200 dollars to let you use this? Then require massive modification to your machine to function. Then hold you hostage if you don't play. Tell me who the Pirate is here. Or have they given you a patch for both eyes? :-) Luck people - this topic bores me.

Actually, a contract is not legally binding if the consideration offered by one of the perties is illegal. Fortunately, if I agree to kill someone for $1000 and try to back out, the courts aren't going to hold me to the contract. :-)

You are confusing contract law with copyright law. My post speaks about the rights granted to MS via copyright law. Has nothing to do with contracts of the EULA.

Glad that despite your self-admittted boredom you chose to contribute.

One point, where are folks getting these absurd XP prices? Let's set the record straight. The Home version of XP will retail at or near the same price as most prior Windows upgrades - $99. You can upgrade to XP if you have any Windows version greater than Win95. XP Pro upgrade for $199. There is little reason for most home users to purchase XP Pro.

Glad that despite your self-admittted boredom you chose to contribute.

One point, where are folks getting these absurd XP prices? Let's set the record straight. The Home version of XP will retail at or near the same price as most prior Windows upgrades - $99. You can upgrade to XP if you have any Windows version greater than Win95. XP Pro upgrade for $199. There is little reason for most home users to purchase XP Pro.

I bet you paid for every piece of software you've ever loaded. Gee... I wonder how you learned Windows. Did you go buy it the first time? Or did you copy it from a friend? Have you paid for WinZip? Have you paid for Acrobat Reader? Yes, both of these have a limited time you can use them under the 'evaluation agreement'. Read their license carefully.
You may bash corporate and you may not like people with more money than you but these are the same people that employ you and me. Unless you own your own company and that would make you one of the corporate "noogies' you speak of.

Maybe I don't understand you...
Are you saying that the WPA doesn't apply to corporate editions of the software? If so, why would there be any need to hack serials. Just copy the corporate edition that this WPA does not apply to.

By the way....
M$ has never tried to enforce their copyrights in the past so what gives them the right to go back and do it now? In fact this is how they made it so big. They allowed software to be 'illegally' copied so that everyone would put it in their personal system. They use, learn and now are relativiely trained on it. Every business now has to use it instead of paying for training on a different OS. Ingenious marketing. Unfortunately the law says the owner must take reasonable precaustions to protect your own material, which M$ in the past, has not. Now they expect the taxpayers to enforce their copyright.

Yep. My company has nearly 200,000 desktops. OfficeXP will be our standard shortly. Could you imagine the chaos if a company of our size had to go through ANY Activation routine? We're skipping XP (the OS) at work, heck, we're only rolling our Win2k now after months and months of compatibility testing and tweaking.

The vast majority of folks won't have access to the corporate stuff. Also, that will be the Pro version of XP.

No doubt there will be warez versions of XP Pro that will install without Activation, no phoney key or other "fixes."

One clarification. Don't confuse "corporate editions" with XP Pro. Corporate licensing of XP can provide media that doesn't require individual Activation.

Of course MS has taken action in the past for copyright infringement.

Seeing as how you seem so sure MS has forfeited their rights (the basis for your whole argument) I figured I'd give you a URL to one of many articles that show MS certainly has pursued copyright infringments. (I still can't believe you really thought otherwise.)

http://www.wired.com/new...C1282%2C32985%2C00.html

Oh, heck, you want a second?
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-335559.html

Shall we keep going? Do a search Microsoft sues. :-)

"You just wrote that these people have been copyrighted."

The people went to doctors and said "I think I'm immune to AIDS" and "I think I have *insert* Genetic disorder" The doctors found the geans, slapped their names on them, and copyrighted them. The people involved felt violated and deceived.

"By reading this you agree to be bound by this EULA...

By opening this box you have agreed to be bound...

Its not "stupid hyperbole" its "stupid insanity" as well as underhanded that someone is going to be forced to agree to something before they can open the box and read it.

Its time for liability in software.

I'm sure consumers do. and yes, EULA's can be contested. A EULA isn't a "law," btw. I think the question you are proposing...

Are you just going to keep repeating everything I say like a patronizing idiot. You're starting to sound like Chris_M$_employee_kablahBlahBlah.

"How about agreeing to something before you ever read it? How about killing someone? How about exclusionary contracts? How about tying services? How about preventing OEMs from installing Netscape?"

> "How about it?"

The "how about it" is that all of these are wrong if not illogical and most of them have been found to be anticompetitive and illegal regardeless of the fact that, these contracts were put into place to "Protect windows copyright."

So, a company that makes so many illegal contracts - a software mafia - is not an honest or fair contract maker.

"Illegal Contracts are not legal."

> "No? Really?. Contracts that have not been contested and proven illegal are, guess what? Still legal."

No they are not. A contract that violates a law is not legal in any way.

I never said the "one copy of an OS per computer" was unenforceable, what I ment was "not in line with fair use." I do have something more to say in all this, but I don't have time to write a book for you today.

"Facts are hell. eh?"

Yeah, especially when they are just a pathetic rehash of what I just said, to make you look right.

Case in point:

You: the law is 100% behind that. Sheesh.
Me: EULA does not make it "The Law". It can be contested.
You: A EULA isn't a "law," btw.
Me: The consumer has certain rights
You: I'm sure consumers do.
Me: It can be contested.
You: and yes, EULA's can be contested.

Acting right and being right are two diffrent things.

The former being "The kind of stupid [hypercorrection] that pretty much destroys an argument."

Unless you were foolish enough ( Jay Leno J-walking) to put it on your primary computer and then you are screwed. :-) to the tune of two hundred bucks.

I did a dual boot for awhile, until I was sure I had no hardware/software incompatibilities. Then I reformatted and installed XP RC2, that's all I'm running now. You're right, I'm stuck buying XP Pro if I want to upgrade now, either that or reformat and start from scratch and I can then use the Home version. Not sure which I'll do, but I don't think there's anything in the Pro version that I need for the extra 100 bucks.

Ah, I get it now. I took a look at some of the other news threads, you're essentially just a little "I Hate the Evil Empire" troll. Gotcha. Constantly calling people names, claiming how superior you are to this "cesspool," how you're SO accomplished at sarcasm , creatively snipping relevant portions of posts so you can respond to something that wasn't said or avoid answering that which was.

And then you whine, "Mommy, he copied me!" and mischaracterize what was said. What a hypocrite.

Go ahead, pound away at the keyboard, throw some more spittle at the monitor and try, unsuccessfully, to release whatever pent up anger you can. I refuse to participate any further in your display of self-loathing. You're a sad little man (boy?) Brian Davidson.

Nothing to see here, folks. Move along.

Oh, sorry, left out the intended plonk.

PLONK

Let´s face it. You dont want to buy it, because you are stingy. It has
nothing to do with freedom or monopol or what ever. That´s just something you use to justify your actions. You want to use it, but dont want to pay for..... cheap

What a good descripton of your self, stlbluesfan. You looked in the mirror for that one huh.

Pure sarcasm. nothing more, nothing less. The referance to Elvis being at MS alive, just means the MS is just as impossible as Elvis being alive.

I think that you are seriously confused when it comes to civil vs. crimal law. You are right when you say that a binding contract can not over-ride laws. But, that means a binding contract can not contradict Constatuional and Crimal law... thats all.

For example, I as a landlord and you as a tenent enter into a binding rental agreement; I can put anything I wan't into that contract, that you agree to, so long as I don't infringe on your Constatutional Rights or break Federal, State or local criminal laws. If you don't live up to your end of the binding contract I can take steps (pre determined in the contract) to break our agreement and get out of my end of the responsiblity.

Can you think of one Constatutional or Criminal Law that Microsoft is breaking by protecting THEIR (that means not yours) intellectual property? If so please let me know and call the DOJ as well I'm sure that they could use you legal expertise.

very well put!

taking you advice and moving along

How so, ol' man? :-)

Am I an I Hate the Evil Empire Troll?
Constantly calling people names? Is ol' man is the same league as "retard"?
Claiming I'm superior to this "cesspool?"
Claiming to be adept at sarcasm
Snipping relevant portions of posts to avoid what was said?
Whining "Mommy, he copied me"?
Perhaps you envision me pounding away at the keyboard, spittle flying?

Maybe you're pissed that I don't agree with your postion. Whatever. Your response that my post descibed me perfectly was about as factual as most of your other posts.

Again, I suggest you bone up on the difference between EULA's and Copyright Law.

With the software as a service idea, you are only paying an arm, instead of both an arm and a leg, because you only pay for the service as long as you are going to use it, and then you get any upgrade that the software has within your subscription for free, rather than paying hundreds of dollars for something that you aren't going to use a year or two down the road.

Second, MS is not watching what you do with the OS, that's just entirely STUPID.

Adding any other barriers (WPA), other than money to using XP, will only hurt consumer relations and sales both for Microsoft and for the PC industry. You create MORE piracy, when they make it harder for honest people to use their products, not less.

Asking for repeat permission, to use a licensed copy of XP or any other WPA product is far beyond logical. Using a crack to turn off the WPA, to me, would be smarter in every aspect.

My prediction is, a massive problem will develop in the future with WPA and Microsoft themselves, will issue a patch, which I am sure they already have in place, to deactivate the WPA, "legally" for every consumer.

Rather than wait, just scrap the stupid WPA idea and spend more time of making Windows work better and for less money and see piracy reduction.

I live in Europe. In my country it is presently almost impossible to by English versions of Microsoft software (another anti-piracy measure?). The problem is that I prefer and always used the English versions (more upgrades etc.). I can buy WinXP in the United States or Britain. No problem with that. I've got used tobuying software this way. But I worry about the necessity of phoning Microsoft overseas to activate WinXP. Especially as American 1-800 phone numbers are not accessible from countries other than USA and Canada. This means I will probably never buy Windows XP. I use now a legal copy of WindowsME plus Linux. I believe the new policy of Microsoft will help me migrate to Linux 100% sooner than I planned.

Well there is a # in your area which you can dial. You select which contry you are in and it gives you a toll-free # in your contry you can call.
Otherwise you can activate via connecting with the inthernet. *using your ISP*
I rely dont see that big of a deal with the activation... why are people so afraid of it? With the 120 day period of "grace" (and even the 30 day period) it allows you to make 1000's of modifications to your computer then after 120 days make a simple process of connecting to the internet then activating.

Whats the BIG DEAL!?

BTW to those who believe activation is cracked think again. RTM is still not out and no one knows the FINAL say on how activation could be coded/bypassed. To those who believe the "magic" serial will work on retail products are wrong. There is a certain version that has different serial acceptions and the "magic" serials will only work with those copys.

Do you own a big top tent? A pulpit? Lotsa stock in a unnamed company? Geezzzz talk about biased, single mined and I just, LOOOVE MICROSOFT. Your a good MS citizen. I thought Linux fans could preach. I was wrong!
The price wont go down. Big business's like MS want an ever increasing bottom line. You cant do that by lowering your prices. Thier trying wpa to see if they can get a little extra outa everyone, if it backfires, expect higher prices to compensate. They will keep up thier ever increasing bottom line at all costs. People have moral's and compassion. Big business doesn't have those attributes, thats why thier are laws. MS has stepped on those laws, they're in court pulling every dirty trick thier is to force the courts to settle on MS terms....................................... and the show goes on......

Who says I "love MS" I am impartial. I love linux and win32... Win32 is easyer to code for so I use it more often.

HEH.. its easer than u think, no protection has been save from pirates and btw, if we want to use the serial we just use a iso from the one that works.. its so ease.

>Well there is a # in your area which you can dial. You select which
> contry you are in and it gives you a toll-free # in your contry
> you can call.

Yes. And I talk to the local Microsoft branch in my which tells me I am supposed to buy Microsoft software in my country, not the Unites States. "Sorry, we cannot help you". This is only my suspitoion at this time (based on other experiences), but I will not rist about $100 to check it.

> Otherwise you can activate via connecting with the inthernet.
> *using your ISP*

I like to change my hardware a lot. I'm talking here about re-activation after the 4 o6 changes I made. This must be done by telephone. I am afraid of being cut off from US activation at that very moment.

Thank you very uch for a product I buy and than have to beg Microsoft to let me use it.

> BTW to those who believe activation is cracked think again.
> RTM is still not out and no one knows the FINAL say on how activation could be coded/bypassed.
[...]

I would not bet my money on the activation not being cracked within a few weeks from the final version release. And this makes me really pissed-off. The reason is that probably the only way I will be able to use a legally owned US version of WindowsXP in my country will be throught the activation crack.

Rubbish. You can call to Activate/Re-Activate and English version of XP while in Europe, and a Japanese version while in the US. Where you are and what language (or where you purchased XP) has NO bearing on calling to activate. More FUD. Sheesh.

Since Windows is so unstable when it arrives on a factory PC, a standard practice of corporate computers is to wipe it out and load strictly Windows. This eliminates the sales junk that comes on every PC. Because Windows is so unstable and you cannot truly "unload" or "uninstall" a software, the only true solution is to reload a system with only the software you intend to use. WPA will cause major problems to corporate IT departments that use tools like Ghost to lower time and costs. In the larger corporate IT departments we reload around 10-35 computers per day. It keeps the users ruuning with less downtime than to try to figure out MS errors.
Face it... the public is Microsoft's Quality Control Department.

WPA will be a non-issue for most corporations. Companies of reasonable size buy licenses that do NOT include WPA. There is no Authentication. If you work in IT and for a company that is going to purchase XP, or Office XP for that matter, and not purcahse those products without WPA, it's time for you to find another company to work for. Seriously.

OK... So why the need to hack WPA. Just make a copy of the corporate edition and it's a done deal. I'm sure the overseas CD pirates will just flood the market with these CDs like they did with office 97. Hackers don't even have to work for it now.

You forget who is targeted by WPA. Of course illegal versions with hacks or S/Ns or whatever will be availble through the usual shady means. But the typical home purchaser of XP, whether an upgrade purchase or a new PC with XP preinstalled is the one who will no longer be able to install on that second PC or loan it to the neighbors across the street. Don't downplay the numbers here. There are alot more of "them" than there are of "you."

If Microsoft is an illegal monpoly, can they sue people for pirating their software? US courts will not allow the persuit of damages from a criminal act. I think any lawsuits from Microsoft with regard to piracy are going to be hard for Microsoft to win.

It doesn't matter if Microsoft is a monopoly. They are being sued for antitrust violations, which have nothing to do with piracy. If you steal a copy of Windows, you are breaking the law - just as if you walked into someone's house and stole their TV. It makes no difference whether or not they had paid rent on the house and were being evicted - you still broke the law by obtaining something by illegal means. Two wrongs don't make a right, they just make two stupid people.

What if the technology existed and I could clone some one's TV? Since they could still use it would it be stealing? hmmmmm....

We're cloning TV's now? I'd love to hear how you would go about cloning a tv? Or does it just mean going to the store and buying the same model tv?
And I guess it would make a difference if it was free-to-air tv or paid-tv. If you got paid-tv for free as a result of you 'cloning'???!!!? then yes it is still stealing (funny that!).

Yes.. they are being prosecuted for illegal acts involving the Anti-Trust laws. This makes them a criminal. In fact the anti-trust laws they are being prosecuted for border RICO act violations.
i.e. Threats to companies and individuals if you don't follow the MS lead.
Interesting "Mafia" style business isn't it...

So does that mean receiving the signals that pass through my home or my body is stealing? Who gave them the right to pass signals through my real estate (which is "by law" owned by me from earth to sky) or my body without my permission? Isn't this stealing also?

Ok that other guy missed my point but you got it.
Look, pretend this is StarTrek and I have a replicator. I walk into your house (invited of course) and I replicate your TV and take it home with me. Now I have an EXACT copy of your TV. I didn't STEAL your TV because you can still use yours, so I didn't take any thing from your possesion. Did I just steal a TV?

My point is that pirating software although wrong because you are taking advantage of a programmer's hard work.... is not the same as walking into a store and taking it off the shelf. Reason being, if you take it off the shelf, they loose 45 bucks and can never make that money back. If you copy the software they can still make that 45 bucks because the box of software is still on the shelf.

Ok, Mr Squareball, let's followup on this silly TV cloning example.

You, Mr. Squareball, are CEO of an corporation that designs and manufacturers consumer electronics. Among your products are swell TVs of every shape and size. You are top-dog in the market, quite profitable.

Now, some Mr Oddball has some magical cloning device, able to replicate your TV products to a "T," the clones indistinguishable from your originals. Mr Oddball proceeds to clone your TVs, gives some away, sells others at a modest cost. Has Mr Oddball stolen your TVs? You haven't lost any from inventory. Every one you produced can be accounted for.

I'm guessing that you would have a problem with someone infringing upon your patent or trademark. I'm guessing you would suspect that some of those folks who bought the discounted clones just might have been your customers if it weren't for the cloned TVs.

Oh, wait. You still have the TV's in inventory. Therfore, you aren't concerned about the cloning. Nothing's been stolen. You'll gladly allow anyone who signs a waiver stating that they weren't going to purchase one of your TVs anyway to pick up a clone, no problem.

Yeah, right.

I think that the TV scenario is way of the mark (and what is with the Star Trek reference? *nerds*). People are mistaken that software is a physical thing like a TV. Software isn't the CD that you buy it the License that you purchase. When you purchased a text book in university/college for $180 do you think it cost that much to make? No, you where paying for the ideas of the author of that book. You can sell the book but then that means you can't use it again without buying back. If you look closely at the copy rights of that book it clearly says that you can not reproduce it. I think that the book reference is more appropriate for this argument.

btw. Sony patented and licensed the Trinitron technology and if you what to make a Trinitron TV you have to pay Sony for the license PER TV set you make. Anything else is THEFT of the patient, the license and Sonys intellectual property.

I rent you a room. If I asked you for rent, but my property could not be legally rented (because some law exists that I needed to document something and didn't - which is real in some states). I could not legally enforce you to pay me.

Thats what I am talking about with Microsoft. If they are illegally saling copies of Windows, then it can't be illegal for someone to pirate it, understand?

I have a computer at my cabin. It has power. But no telephone service. If I wanted to upgrade to Windows XP, would I have to install the program, write down a code, drive into a city to call Microsoft, get another code, then drive out to my cabin and enter it?

Please email me at joshua@prowse.com if you have any information about this. It seems to me that Microsoft isn't erring on the side of consumers whatsoever - this seems to offer no benefits to consumers and many benefits to Microsoft. It's more difficult for consumers and it introduces a needless procedure and extra expense. It will earn Microsoft more money due to reduced piracy, but consumers won't see any of that in a reduced product price. Consumers also won't see that in improved product quality since Microsoft seems to take Windows revenue and put it into building up other areas of the company.

This is downright anti-consumer and I don't like it one bit.

youre right, it screws customers.

And it wont cut down piracy at all. Activation has already been cracked, and any warez copy of XP beta you download has a crack so you dont have to activate, same will happen when the final is released. So its not preventing piracy.

If you code it, they will crack it.

Again it is NOT ment to totaly stop piracy. Sure it is cracked yet this stops STANDARD users from just buying XP and giving it to their friends and such.

it stops them, or it turns them on to the warez world. it isn't like microsoft was hurting when their software was the most pirated software around, so why all the fuss over trying to stop piracy? i guess they needed to add to their billion dollar empire.

I totally agree.

yeah but if I bought XP and burned a copy for my friends, I would make sure I gave them a crack with it. So would pretty much everyone else who burns copies for their friends

It's not going to stop what it is intended to. Matter of fact it will start a wave of pirates which I'll call "End user revolters". I see no less than 50 customers a day in my shop and I cant recall any of them being happy with WPA or likely to upgrade to XP, because of wpa and other issue's. I have no plans to install or even carry a stock of WinXP. There's no demand at my location. Just have to wait until the time comes and adjust accordingly.

The benefit to the consumer is that reduced piracy will lower software costs. Since Microsoft thinks that 80% of its software is pirated, we can expect the price of Windows XP to drop to approximately $19.95.

Oh, wait... Amazon.com was actually selling XP for MORE than Windows 2000... funny that.

When an OS is hyped up it allways costs more when it hits the shelves. When MS notices a huge increase in sales (because STANDARD users do not know where they can grab a cracked copy) you can expect prices to drop. WAY DOWN!
Besides.. with the new "grace" period WinXP will be more accepted. 180 day activation period? (if more then 4 modifications are made within that period of time) is much better then the standard 30 days.

what you all have to consider is that the GOAL of WPA is to just stop people from going to the store, buying winxp, and making 5 or so copys for his/her friends. I am not talking about "smart" users I am just talking about the ones who dont know enough information about cracks to even get one.

With the 180 day grace period of activation I bet people will accept WinXP even with WPA

Yes.. Because "you" know how to obtain the cracks. Some standard users dont know enough to do that.

In the 'real' world, just because something can't be stolen (or its harder) does not mean the price will go down. I don't see Playstation 2, Dreamcast, or Nintendo game prices go dwon, and they are very hard to duplicate.

All we're doing by paying these prices is feeding Microsoft. By feeding Microsoft we can help Microsoft easily destroy all its competition and we can enjoy the benefits of higher prices...

suckers we all all....

They need the money to battle against Netscape, Sun, IBM, Oracle, etc.. All the bad companies that would probably help consumers, but do harm to Microsoft.

And we can all do our part to aid a criminal.

Which raises a question: If Microsoft is an illegal monpoly, can they sue people for pirating their software? US courts will not allow the persuit of damages from a criminal act. I think any lawsuits from Microsoft with regard to piracy are going to be hard for Microsoft to win.

Most new PCs come with an OS which is usually an MS product so they get a licence fee anyway. Now add ons are usually more expensive, such as Office and are more easily and more ofetn pirated (because they are expensive). So I think WPA for XP is just the start. MS is seeing how wpa goes and then they will start ot add it to other products where the problems are greater

Where do you get 180 day grace period for Activation? For the betas it's 15 days, for the final release you have to Activate within 30 days.

That's ridiculous. There's no connection WHATSOEVER between any court proceedings regarding MS monopolies and the FACT that MS has a copyright for its products. Can you be any more wrong? Give it a try.

Sounds like you weren't already aware, but Activation is a "feature" for OfficeXP as well. I agree, MS will work the kinks out of Product Activation and it will become the norm, both for MS products and for other vendors.

Most people feel they have the right to install legally bought software on all their computers (yes, some people have more than one). They are probably wrong from the legal point of view but that will not make them pay another $100-$200 for the second PC or laptop.

This policy of Microsoft will really add them some income from corporate buyers who sometimes do not realize that they do not have enough Windows licences for all their PCs, but mostly will slow down migration from earlier Windows versions and help the free operating systems (mostly Linux) in gaining some market share at the same time.

LOL. Your example doesn't hold water. For it to be relevant at all, console games would have had to have been very easy to duplicate before, only to have them become near impossible to duplicate now.

Did you even read this????
"A grace period of 120 days between activations will open a window for power users to install Windows on a separate PC than the machine initially activated. This means power users can perform substantial hardware changes without worry. Nieman pointed out that customers are still bound by the End User License Agreement (EULA) and cannot install on more than one PC at a time."
Which means that after you activate within the fist 30 days you have 180 days after you make 5 changes to your system to re-activate.

Yeah and think.. how else are you going to try to stop piracy. MS has the right idiea.. it may work.. It is sad that it had to resort to this type of technology though

First, you didn't say 180 days grace "between" Activations. It's 15 for Activating the beta, 30 for Activating the retail copy.

Now, you get 120 day grace period between activations. Not 180. You're trying to add the original 30, the 120 grace and ANOTHER 30. It doesn't work that way. Technically you will have 150 days before you would have to activate that second installation, not 180.

> When an OS is hyped up it allways costs more when it hits the
> shelves. When MS notices a huge increase in sales (because
> STANDARD users do not know where they can grab a cracked copy)
> you can expect prices to drop. WAY DOWN!

In normal competetive markets, the prices drop where there is not enough demand or too much supply, not the other way. This is basic economics. Only in markets cornered by an monopolist it may work the way you describe. Do you know that you supply ammunition for those who want to regulate the OS market?

Technical Point: WPA has NOT been cracked. It has been at best bypassed. Resetting the time or replacing files from a much earlier build is just bypassing it.

On a not so technical point I have no doubt in my mind that the final version will be available to download with a 'magic' serial number (ala Office XP) from your favourite location (ftp, irc and eventually web and usenet). It's one of those applications that a blind person could find - so to speak.

hahahaha you actually believe M$ is going to lower prices???? are you serious????

thats too funny!!! Oh man, I hehehehe whew....that's hilarious!!!!

Do you even bother to read? It was clearly explained in the article that you -just posted a response to- that the timeframe had been changed. Pay attention and maybe you won't look like a moron.

Not for original activation. You apparently didn't bother to read my later post. Read first, then you wouldn't look like such a moron. :-)

This is not a normal competitive market. There are suggested retail prices. What is being sold is not a tangible good, and CDs can be rolled out within days if demand were higher than expected. And if demand were lower than expected, stores would not suddenly lower prices, because one company controls the means of production (like most products), and therefore they know that they can hold on to the CDs till someone buys it and if noone buys it ever, they can return it. This is not like gold, or rice, or wheat. This is not a perfectly competitive market. Don't just spit back stuff you learned in your highschool economics class and expect it to apply here.

It's a bit more complicated than that. Agreed, we're not dealing with competitive goods here. And MS products are rarely discounted at retail. Heck, Win98 and ME still go for the original list price most places. However, if it were up to the retail stores, you bet they would lower the price if the software wasn't moving. It costs them to let the software sit on the shelves, the last thing a retailer wants is to hold on to the products hoping someone eventually buys it. And most of this MS software is not purchased on consignment and returnable if the retailer decides not to sell it. MS has alot of say as to the price we pay for their products via incentives and participation in advertising.