Microsoft Marketing to OS Pirates, Just Agree to Audits!

Stony Stevenson writes "In the latest sign that Microsoft expects to support its Windows XP operating system for the foreseeable future, the company has introduced a new licensing program designed to let users of fake or pirated copies of the business version of the OS upgrade to fully licensed copies. To qualify, users of illegitimate versions of Windows XP Pro must pledge to use only genuine Microsoft software going forward and agree to have their software infrastructure audited. Resellers who push the Get Genuine Windows Agreement to customers will get a cut of any new license fees they generate, Microsoft said."

Yeah, right

[sprag (38460)]

If someone is pirating windows, why would they self identify and then agree to an eternal audit of their infrastructure?

Re:

[SnoopJeDi (859765)]

Well, a significant portion of these "pirates" are supposedly people/groups that have no idea that they are breaking any rules. So, I would imagine those people would be the target, not Captain CheapAss (Yarrrgggh).

Re:Yeah, right

[Iphtashu Fitz (263795)]

Well, a significant portion of these "pirates" are supposedly people/groups that have no idea that they are breaking any rules.

If they have no idea that they're running a pirated copy of Windows then how would they know they should consider this offer by MS?

Re:

[jimstapleton (999106)]

1) Some people who weren't certain, and might wonder (i.e. wow, this was rather cheap when I ordered from that seedy web site I got an email from...) might check and agree
2) Some people who later found their copy wasn't legit, after the fact, but didn't have the money to do anything about it, might go for it.

Re:

[The Spoonman (634311)]

And, in those cases, where a company can clearly document that they've made a reasonable effort to ensure they didn't buy pirated software, but can show they were defrauded by a dealer, will always be given a pass by these companies. But, they'll always decide to press the issue if the offending company can't prove they DIDN'T buy pirated software. If they walk in and you've got one licensed copy of Windows on 400 machines and you've got no documentation anywhere that shows you own even one more...they're

Re:Yeah, right

[deniable (76198)]

It's called getting caught.

You get a choice of pay up or go to court, unless their looking to make an example of someone. They've been doing it for a fairly long time here.

Re:Yeah, right

[bogaboga (793279)]

To qualify, users of illegitimate versions of Windows XP Pro must pledge to use only genuine Microsoft software going forward and agree to have their software infrastructure audited.

Suppose I were a pirate; what would I get in this? After all, I can still get my copy of Windows software "free".

Microsoft should know better: There is no difference between a pirated copy of its software and a genuine one. They work the same, have the same bugs, crash the same way etc etc. I do not see any incentive to agreeing to these audits at all.

By the way, I do not see any indemnification from a law suite by Microsoft. Or did I miss something?

Re:Yeah, right

[Bert64 (520050)]

Actually there are differences, very important ones.

The pirated copy is *BETTER*.

You don't have to deal with WGA
You don't have the hassle of re-activating it if you upgrade/change your hardware
You often don't have the hassle of entering and storing (without losing) the license key when you reinstall
And the obvious - that it's cheaper

Re:Yeah, right

[Lesrahpem (687242)]

The pirated copy is *BETTER*.

You don't have to deal with WGA
You don't have the hassle of re-activating it if you upgrade/change your hardware
You often don't have the hassle of entering and storing (without losing) the license key when you reinstall
And the obvious - that it's cheaper

Not only that, but there's kind of a big incentive, aside from the monetary one, for OEM's who install priated copies of windows. I've seen a pirated ISO of XP SP2 that:

• has most general optimizations done already
• comes with stupid stuff, like the alerter and messaging service, and remote assistance, turned off by default
• It also has the option to automatically install a bunch of nice software. It just asks you about it when it's done with the install. It has open office, the sun JRE, a version of notepad with syntax highlighting and tabs, firefox (with the flash plugin, noscript, and adblock), thunderbird, avira antivir, and 7zip.
• After it's done installing it asks if you want to make a backup. You pop in a DVD and it'll make a recovery disk you can boot from to restore the computer to exactly like it was at the time of installation

This means that instead of it taking around an hour and a half to install windows, tweak it so it acts right, and install all that software, it takes about a half hour. Also, customers really like having a recovery disk like that sometimes (the created disk, by the way, also acts as a regular XP install disk if you want it to).

It's better quality, in almost every way, than the "genuine" Windows XP OEM disks.

Re:

[Frosty Piss (770223)]

Suppose I were a pirate...

They are not targeting YOU. Keep on running your unsupported pirate copy of XP with unknown security backdoors. Your choice.

But there are actual real businesses, mostly outside the US but certainly some here as well, that are starting to understand that there are liabilities to running unpatched and unsupportable pirate copies of XP. They should and probably will jump at this.

Obligatory Slashdot Disclaimer: Of course they should be running GNU/Linux, nectar of the Gods, panacea to

Re:Yeah, right

[sqrt(2) (786011)]

What world do you live in? The "unpatched and unsupportable" pirate copies of XP are, in fact, bit-for-bit identical to the legit retail and corporate versions. They update just like the real thing, they work just like the real thing, they ARE the real thing. Everything except for the license/CD key is genuine. The difference between a "pirate" copy and a real one is your authorization to use it, the license, not the software itself.

Re:Yeah, right

[apdyck (1010443)]

I feel that it needs to be pointed out that this program targets business customers. Microsoft isn't going to waste their resources on the average home user who is running a pirated copy of XP Pro (probably after a system wipe to get rid of Vista or XP Home!). This does make some amount of sense in that context. The majority of Microsoft's revenue comes from OEM installations (which we usually don't get much of a choice in anyhow), and from business customers who order thousands of licenses. As a former Microsoft OEM vendor, I have seen the evolution of their policies from the early days of Windows 95 and upwards, and let me tell you - this makes more sense than their requirement for Office 97 SBE OEM to only be installed on an OEM installation of Windows 95 or 98!

With regards to the audits, there are many software solutions for audits of software, and Microsoft keeps a database of all registered licenses (I've seen this database, a friend of mine was a manager at a call center handling Microsoft activations calls), so it would be easy for Microsoft to run an audit of installed software and compare it with their database of registered software. If they notice any discrepancies, they could then conduct further investigation into the cause. Granted, it would be a lot of work on their part to conduct a more in-depth audit, but it would, invariably, result in revenue for Microsoft, so it would be worth-while for them.

Re:Sometimes backfires.

[Technician (215283)]

but it would, invariably, result in revenue for Microsoft, so it would be worth-while for them.

Not always. Sometimes the move isn't as dramatic or as public as the story in the link below.

http://www.news.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html [news.com]

Often it is much more quiet as the gears start rolling. For me personally, this stuff is a major factor in why I avoid Microsoft EULA licenses and discovered the wonderful world of open standards and open source.

It started with WGA and product activation. I have way too many computers to keep up to date at retail prices. Due to the MS way of doing things, my family has 3 versions of MS Office. My old PIII has a copy of Office 97. It still has the OEM Windows 98 on it. (Don't fret, it's dual boot and only boots Windows for the GPS software which is Windows only) The Wife's XP machine has my copy of Office 2000 which was free from work. Her new laptop for her masters degree came with Vista. Through my employer's homeware agreement with Microsoft we picked up a copy of Office 2007 for a nominal fee of about $20. It is valid only while I am employed with the company. The compatibility issues between versions is a pain in the backside, but providing the same version on all machines is way too expensive.

On the other side, all my machines have Open Office. The license is such that I am permitted to install it on every machine in my home (and give away copies to friends). Do you see a trend here? Incompatibile versions and single install licenses or a a site wide license so all machines can have the same version for the home.

As the Open Document Format becomes standardized it should be obvious to anyone why Open Office and other ODF compatible office software is going to erode Microsoft's market. Tightening the screws is only going to accelerate the adoption of alternatives.

If you have more then 2 computers (laptop and desktop) because you have a family, keeping them all in sync with per seat software is expensive. You either have to decide to spend a lot, or figure out which machine gets the office software. With the competition, everyone can have a legal copy on their desktop and laptop.

After introduction to Sum Microsystems Star Office (home site license for all machines) and then Linux and Open Office, The Microsoft License doesn't look very good for a family SOHO. I can deal with slightly less mature software instead of the big dent in the bottom line.

When I truly need the Microsoft product due to some requirement, I can borrow the wife's laptop. For everything else, Open Office is what I am using. It is on both my laptops, my kids machine, my daughters laptop, my main machine, and my old PIII Dual boot machine. This is the migration that MS can't stop.

Re:

[cp.tar (871488)]

I guess this is only moderately useful to businesses, as they may get hurt if they're caught.

I, however, don't see a single reason to "upgrade" to a legal copy: I, unlike own^H^H^Hlicencees of legal copies, am not annoyed by WGA, I will never have to deal with their tech support, my Windows installation will never enter Reduced Functionality Mode (RFM? Isn't that kind of like RTFM?)... I only use Windows to play games only available on Windows.

And I see no reason to ever allow Microsoft to audit anything

Re:Yeah, right

[fwarren (579763)]

Microsoft isn't losing any money because he's using some pirated copy of Windows. He would have never bought their software at the price they wanted/with restrictions on his liberties in place/other reason to not use it. So they're not really losing a sale, since he was never going to buy it anyway.

But Microsoft still obtains benefit.....

Microsoft will GLADLY claim him as a Windows User when it tells developers not to develope games for Linux or Mac. Micosoft most certainly does not want people running other OS's. No matter how much they complain. They would prefer you to run a pirate copy of Windows to you running a Mac or Linux.

Re:

[cp.tar (871488)]

Well theft is always cheaper. I'm not sure how its easier; you have no store you can go into and simply buy a copy of software?

Well, yes, I could.

But I'd have to actually go to a store, not just tell any of my friends I needed a Windows CD and get it, sometimes right away. Outside working hours, too.

So don't use if, if it doesn't meet your needs or you don't find value in it. You are damaging someone; your making it more expensive for people who do buy it, you're affecting a company which does employ people.

I'm sorry, are you actually suggesting that if everyone bought Windows, it would be cheaper?

I don't know about you, but I've lived my whole life being sucked dry by monopollies, including the German telco giant abusing the monopolly they'd bought - practically with our own money.

Giants get no sympathy from me, for they sure have

Re:Yeah, right

[ElleyKitten (715519)]

If someone is pirating windows, why would they self identify and then agree to an eternal audit of their infrastructure?

Prior employees at my company pirated software instead of get it legitly like management wants. I'm sure they'd benefit from a program like this, and might even thank me for telling them about it instead of yelling at me for telling them there's pirated software on their computers, but I hate my job and do not care. Which is why I'm browsing Slashdot and Monster and calling it "working".

Actually

[El Lobo (994537)]

Actually many here will, of course, disagree with me, but this is a very smart and good move, not only for Microsoft, but for the users. There are a lot of users thta have their Windows locked from further updates, because they installed the GA software and they WERE actually running a pirated Windows. Some of them have, after that , adquired a legal license, but others, just sit there with their pirated copy.

This is actually a good solution for those people and a civilizated solution for the whole problem.

Sure, bring on now the "oh, MS wants just to mantain the monopoly", "oh, they will kill people privacities", etc... No matter waht you say, this IS a good move.

Re:

[ConceptJunkie (24823)]

Given that copies of Windows that are locked out of updates are very likely to be parts of botnets, it is a good thing. Microsoft has a responsibility to mitigate some of the mess they've made over the years.

Re:Actually

[El Lobo (994537)]

Critical updates are not locked out even for pirated copies, so don't worry, it's not about that, they take responsability even for pirated copies.

same wit kb repository

[da5idnetlimit.com (410908)]

it's a lot more work, but you can download all the updates manually, too...

Re:

[ConceptJunkie (24823)]

Good for them. I totally understand about not wanting to reward pirates, but MS has a responsibility to disarm the millions of ticking time-bombs they've loosed on the 'net and it sounds like they are.

I know, maybe they could rig up some way for pirated copies of Windows to remain secure (such as it is) but be huge, bloated and slow, without offering improved functionality over legitimately-licensed copies of XP. Oh, wait, I just described Vista.

I'm no big fan of Microsoft*, but I do like XP by the way, s

Re:

[Txiasaeia (581598)]

"Some of them have, after that , adquired a legal license, but others, just sit there with their pirated copy."

And some of them just reinstall Windows, turn on Automatic Updates (don't download, let me choose) and deselect "WGA" in the updates. After this, Windows can be updated through Automatic Updates without a hitch.

Re:

[El Lobo (994537)]

nope, some newer downloads can only be downloaded (without hacking the system) if you have WGA. Those are not critical updates, though.

Re:

[InvisblePinkUnicorn (1126837)]

Please note: the adjective form of "civilization" is not "civilizated".

Re:Actually

[ozmanjusri (601766)]

No matter waht you say, this IS a good move.

It's nonsensical.

I'm pirating Windows.

I own and have paid for a copy of XP for every computer I'm running it on, but I run pirate (volume license) copies because product activation and WGA are such a pain in the arse that it's better to firewall unpatched machines than license them.

Microsoft has made pirated copies of Windows better products than legitimate versions. That's why this "initiative" is bullshit and will fail.

Audit? Idiot.

[Aladrin (926209)]

The audit is idiotic. They have the choice of grabbing lots of cash from a company that wants to get legal, or scaring companies that want to get legal and not getting the money.

I suppose the third choice is the company that pays the money, despite being scared, and ... WTF. Why would they do that? The only possible outcome is giving a monopolistic corporation unlimited access to your tech infrastructure. That just can't be a good idea.

Re:

[Bert64 (520050)]

Well, if you run modern versions of windows you already give a monopolistic corporation unlimited access to (and control over) your infrastructure... You even explicitly agreed to it in the EULA.

msoft:

[kevin.fowler (915964)]

Hey mister pirate... will you help us find our lost OS? I last saw him with candy and a puppy running into that unmarked van other there.

What do they mean, exactly?

[scribblej (195445)]

In what sense do they mean "use only genuine Microsoft software?" Do they mean if you are using MS software you must agree to pay for it which is so obvious it hardly bears saying, I mean, they will be auditing you... of course you will not get away with using more MS pirated software.

Or do they mean you must avoid software from any vendor but MS?

I read the article but it doesn't clarify.

What's the Point?

[darthflo (1095225)]

What exactly is the goal of this new program? They offer businesses the chance to license their (currently mislicensed) installed versions of WinXP, don't seem to offer a huge discount on that and want an assurance of no more mislicensing and an audit?
Why would any business do that instead of just buying a normal volume license? What's the advantage in this?

And?

[mpapet (761907)]

In my limited experience in the U.S., there are two kinds of shops, ones that are good about not stealing software and the other that steals as they see fit. In the case of the shop that steals, they generally swing into compliance if the business takes off. In my limited dealings with my counterparts in Taiwan and China, they operate similarly.

As much as I really, really don't like Microsoft's business practices, this kind of program is just fine by me. It is the brain child of some manager at Microsoft who figured out a novel way to further monetize their customers. Will this manager get a gold star on her review? Probably. Will it fail? (e.g. cost Microsoft a bunch of money) No. Will there be limited/no market penetration? Probably.

Re:

[somersault (912633)]

I thought that saying 'her' was an attempt at being PC, as I generally do when I see 'she' in coding or whatever books..

As a man, I don't give a toss that he said she. I do get offended that there are some companies that sell car insurance to *only* women, because you know the women would all be bitching if there was an insurance company only for guys..

What does this do for their sales?

[t_ban (875088)]

So now the cheapest way to get a brand new legal copy of 2k/XP/Vista is to d/l it from a bittorrent source and get it authenticated by M$?

Disclaimer: haven't read TFA.

Tinfoil Hat

[suv4x4 (956391)]

To qualify, users of illegitimate versions of Windows XP Pro must pledge to use only genuine Microsoft software going forward and agree to have their software infrastructure audited.

That's very subtle, they're signing to use only genuine Microsoft software, not signing to never use non-genuine Microsoft software. Could they come after me if I signed this and decided to go for BSD, or Linux or whatever?

You think I'm paranoid? Check the universities, schools, and OEM's and if it's easy for them to ship/use non-Windows machines after their "exclusive" MS agreement.

Then throw the audits in. Why would someone come out and say "ok I had 100 hacked XP machines. Audit me and lock me into agreement to buy your software", versus just silently buy the licenses they need?

There's something bigger here, could possibly start going after illegal users based on data phoned home (during Error Reports, Autoupdates, etc.). If they do, I can see audits + mandatory Windows could be suddenly heaven compared to having unleashed the entire legal team of MS on your ass.

Re:

[Bert64 (520050)]

I would actually welcome a software audit, it would be fairly amusing...
The only commercial software i have, is a copy of OSX that came with my macbook, and a significant number of machines running mostly linux, one or two running solaris.

Arrrrr righty then....

[LinuxGeek (6139)]

Everyone knows, once you go Pirate you never go back. Free lovin' of something ( even as bad as windows vista) makes it hard to go back to payin' for it... Thats why I love Linux, versions range from expensive business server to cheap and loose floozy, your choice! :)

Seriously though, how is this position not monopoly abuse by MS? Can other software companies adopt this position and still survive? Letting people steal your software, knowing about it, and then getting them to agree to a contract to keep using the stolen version. This must make people that have been busted [osv.org.au] by MS and the BSA feel pretty mad. When can they expect refunds of the fines they had to pay? And a public apology too?

Cripes!

[Tau Neutrino (76206)]

It's bad enough I have to use XP. No way am I going to pay for it. Get real!

Improving security

[athloi (1075845)]

The botnets out there are composed of Windows computers that are unpatched. Some are unpatched through user cluelessness, but more commonly, through pirated copies of Windows XP. If it costs $200 to get Geek Squad to (fail to) clean viruses and trojans from your PC, and you can upgrade to a self-updating copy of Windows XP for the same price, wouldn't you?

I love bandwagons!

[Godai (104143)]

I know it's trendy to clap our hands with glee that Vista is apparently not being taking up with the gusto Microsoft hoped, but what the hell does this story have to do with that?

In the latest sign that Microsoft expects to support its Windows XP operating system for the foreseeable future...

You know how Microsoft made their case for OOXML weaker by stacking the deck at every opportunity? It works that way for other things too. If something's wrong, don't keep tossing in arguments that are stupid, that undermines your case. Making comments like that make you seem peevish, and your opinion or argument suffers by ass

It almost reminds me of a song...

[Cleon (471197)]

Desperado, why don't you come to your senses...

It works on a couple of different levels. :P

Dear Microsoft

[Sounder40 (243087)]

An open letter to Microsoft:

Dear Microsoft, The reason I am stealing a copy of Windows XP in the first place is because I like [PhotoShop, Quicken, (insert your own app)] and I was too lazy to switch to something that doesn't require your over-encumbered OS. But now that you're forcing me to, I'll be more than glad to.

So kindly sod off and die.

Sincerely,

Joe Sixpack

That's what I would do. If I were actually running an illegal copy of Windows and got that offer from Microsoft; not that I am, mind you

Are they also going to let me continue running XP

[mmell (832646)]

under Xen?

Vista (as preinstalled on my Acer) horked within forty-five minutes of initial boot. The "PC Angel" software (which was supposed to do a reinstall from a hidden partition on the HDD) likewise barfed. After three weeks, I got the "Restore DVD's" from Acer, which likewise vomited. Long story short, Vista only stayed up long enough to get me registered, now it won't run at all.

Funny thing . . . I got ahold of a student version of XP Pro - ran it up in a Xen domain to prove that I could, then it failed to install directly onto the hardware. That's right - my dual-core AMD X64 machine with a SATA drive can't seem to handle Windows XP, but Xen (under OpenSuSE 10.2) can. WGA works, the virtual XP system is fully updated and ready to rock, but I still have a three year old copy of Doom III which I've never run because I don't have a platform to run it on! So far, I'm only out thirty bucks for Doom III (plus an OEM Vista license, whatever that's worth), but I find it mildly irritating that I have to run a pirate version of WinXP just to get back some of what Best Buy/Acer/Microsoft owe me. Oh, and don't think about calling any of the above for help - M$ doesn't want to hear about it (after all, they didn't sell me a Windows OS), Acer's tech support people in New Delhi don't speak English well enough to understand what I'm trying to tell them, and Best Buy's response was (quite correctly) to offer to give me my money back on the hardware as a warranty issue.

So . . . if I buy into this, will M$ continue to tell me that I have an OEM license and don't desserve support, or will they help me to actually get their software to install and run correctly (well, as correctly as M$ software runs, anyhow)?

I think I'll keep my eyepatch and cutlass, thank you - at least, I know that they work. Arrgh!

Smells like Microsoft alright

[HangingChad (677530)]

Sounds like a way for VAR's to approach small to medium size companies with an offer to "get legal" on their software installs. Which arises from the assumption that all small to medium size companies are running some unlicensed copies of something. The VAR's get a piece of the action and Microsoft has plausible deniability. Oh, those darn VAR's! They're such scamps (wink-wink, nudge-nudge).

Reminds me of some of the things RIAA did. I could see VAR's dressing up like they're some type of investigator and showing up at some company unannounced, claiming the company might be running illegal software and this is their one chance to come clean or face legal action. Or maybe Microsoft tips them off because someone there is using a volume license key that doesn't belong to them. And it won't stop at OS software, I'm sure they'll audit everything. Workstations, servers, the whole enchilada. A VAR might be pimping for a number of different software companies.

To me this is more of a sign of how desperate Microsoft is to keep up their quarterly numbers. When they need numbers they go back to the well of their existing user base and squeeze. After all, that's free money. Collecting on what's already out there.

It seems so strange to me that companies take the most incredible crap from Microsoft. Switch already. If you can't handle the Linux tech stuff get a Mac.

Re:Yes, I "promise" never to do it again

[Aladrin (926209)]

No, that's why they force the company to sign a contract to submit to audits... Probably plural. Microsoft clearly expects to use this as an 'in' to monitor criminals... Dream on.

Re:Yes, I "promise" never to do it again

[jimstapleton (999106)]

Of course not, that's what the auditing is for!

But all things considered, I wonder where I can get Genuine Microsoft FreeBSD, KDE, OpenOffice, BASH, GIMP, Pidgin, Firefox...

awe screw it.

Re:

[ceoyoyo (59147)]

From Novell?

Re:

[kevin.fowler (915964)]

Does that mean that they will they give me a letter of Marque to Pirate Apple software?

Re:

[Cherveny (647444)]

Along these lines, if the audit had to be done before the old, invalid license is updated, what's to prevent them from allowing you to upgrade, but then later charging you with software piracy using the audit's findings as evidence.

Re:

[jimicus (737525)]

Earn credibility... read the post you're replying to. There is such a thing as Microsoft SQL Server 2003, which was what I posted. Also, at least one company has been on the wrong end of an audit despite being little more than "a few licenses" out of compliance - eg. http://www.news.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html [news.com] - I don't know how big the company is but if it's any significant size, "a few dozen licenses" is nothing.