Microsoft Updates Vista In Latest Piracy Crackdown

[fisherd3]

Dear Cdnvic , you are right in your anaysis concerning the illegal use of creative works/intellectual property in a simplistic sense as the likes of microsoft would have you analyse it.

However the U.S. and it's companies/lobbies religous groups/tobacco companies/farmers/pharmaceutical companies are very good at expecting legal purity from those who use one aspect of it's industry or another to maximise their profits whilst behaving in a wholly illogical and contradictory way if the pure approach to morality/legality does not maximise profits.

E.g. The U.S. goes out to South America and others espousing free trade because it will maximise U.S. profits.

Now I a U.K. citizen the U.K. whom I should imagine is wholly entagled in a free trade agreement with the mighty U.S., and I want to download from a legal U.S. web site for money an MP3 tune price .99 cents, gbp0.50 , I am prohibited in doing so because my plastic is U.K. based, I am referred to the U.K web site of the same company where low and behold the same tune is GBP.89p ($1.73) , (nearly x2) and not only that the tune itself is two thirds as long as on the U.S. web site. (which makes more than x2) In fact the tune I want is withheld from the U.K. market.

So where is the morality competition and free trade and spirit of the www in this scenario, I am being penalised because I am not residing in the U.S. CDNVIC you may think this is OK but I do not. And seems to actually completely against the free trade ethic espoused by the U.S. when they want to dominate a market.

I therefore have no respect for the laws that you espouse because they are wholly contradicted in related instances only to maximise U.S. companies profits in a dishonest manner, and why should anyone else?

As I believe that it is viewed legally that companies have a greater responsibilty to society than mere individuals this compounds the big company immoral behaviour wholly condoned by government, and strangley enough makes the apparently illegal behaviour of the individual merely a logical response to the legally (i.e.big money) justified , immoral behaviour of the U.S. mega corporations even judged by their own trading principles.

Recently Bill Gates has stated that his company has gone too far with DRM the latest attempt by his company and others such as I tunes/I pod to to corner the market in recorded music for their financial benefit, (not the benefit of the artists as they might imply and Cdnvic may believe ask Nina Simone how much $ she receives from MP3 royalties)).

This will certainly cause the failure of the Microsoft MP3 player Zune recently Launched and their Windows Media Player 11 riddled with this DRM (as I read on this board is Vista) as people such as myself legally download tunes from the internet for money, and suddenly cannot play them, because of some aspect of Windows Media player that is beyond the wit of ordinary consumers as stated by Bill Gates one could say 'the boss' of the rip off artists.

Take Bill Gates actual advice forget downloads buy a CD and rip it, and as long as the big boys are ripping you, just return the sentiment!!!

Edited December 20, 2006 by fisherd3

[cdnvic]

So because you can't buy from iTunes it excuses you for stealing Windows?

In many countries ripping CDs you legally own is not illegal, so have at it. Your other whining seems to say that because record companies rip off artists for much of your money it's ok for you to rip them off completely. I have no idea how tobacco companies play into this.

As I believe that it is viewed legally that companies have a greater responsibilty to society than mere individuals this compounds the big company immoral behaviour wholly condoned by government, and strangley enough makes the apparently illegal behaviour of the individual merely a logical response to the legally (i.e.big money) justified , immoral behaviour of the U.S. mega corporations even judged by their own trading principles.

That's a total wank. If you think companies have a greater responsibility to society then it would make sense that they have greater rights also. I disagree with that.

I think it's funny that when it comes to disagreeing with the way the music or software business is run, you don't see alot of people saying they're going to start using Ubuntu, or getting their music from the radio (That would require them to learn something new, or to be inconvenienced). Instead they choose to steal it and say it's someone elses fault. Many of these same people cry blue murder when they get charged extra for a songtaew ride, or to get into a national park, and when their pirated Windows breaks down they curse Microsoft.

I could at least have a sliver of respect for the person with the balls to stand up and admit they're stealing but just don't care. But this whining about how it's the fault of the big bad corporations is just pathetic and sad.

If you want to steal, then steal. But don't blame others for your choice.

[Plus]

There are many aspects to this. Like the word "steal". It doesn't apply to Windows per se as it's still there after people steal it, it probably applies to unrealised profits, not the software.

Another angle is to look at what happens with other products and what actually happens with Microsoft. You can get Avast AV for free as a home user but need to pay to get professional or corporate edition. You can get pirated Windows for free for home use but need to buy a real copy to do anything professionally. For the end user the experience is comparable but while for one company it's a criminal offense, for another it's a viable business model!

And, speaking of business, we don't know what would MS do in the third world if there was no piracy. Would Windows become a universal standard if all the usual software hasn't been pirated as well - Office, ACDsee, PowerDVD, Photoshop - Windows is pretty much useless without it.

There are many ifs, and MS could always throw his monopoly card around, but if Linux came out say ten years ago and there was no pirate Windows alternatives, it could have easily become the default stardard. And let's not forget Apple. It doesn't look expensive at all comparing to fully legal windows machine. The biggest argument against Apple is that "everyone has Windows", which in this part of the world means everyone has FREE windows.

Let's see what happens with Vista, especially if they manage to defend it from hackers. Will anyone buy it? I bet many power users would save their hardware for running games instead of overloading it with Vista.

But, I agree with Cdnvic, as long as Microsoft calls it stealing and is extremely unhappy about it, that's what it is.