Microsoft Launches Comical Effort to Fight Piracy

theodp writes "A week before the release of Vista, Microsoft is expanding its fight against software piracy with a new educational effort that includes comics. Making its U.S. debut Monday, the Genuine Fact Files campaign aims to make Microsoft's message more accessible to a broader audience. BTW, Vista's Software Protection Platform (SPP) can put unvalidated copies of the software into a reduced-functionality mode. From the article: 'Microsoft plans to draw attention to it through banner ads on its Web sites and promotional material that it will hand out through partners. By using comics, the company aims to make the message more accessible to a broader audience. They are black and white, in a style similar to newspaper comics.'"

So uncool

[udderly]

Isn't it peculiar that when someone (an individual, gov't or corporation) tries to pander to the hip or "kewl" crowd, it actually comes off as even more contrived and lame. This Microsoft comic reminds me of junior-high school health classes about drugs or sex.

Besides that, Microsoft has to walk a fine line with software piracy. If they could eliminate it entirely, that would be when you would see a more mainstream adoption of FOSS.

Re:So uncool

[TodMinuit]

If they could eliminate it entirely, that would be when you would see a more mainstream adoption of FOSS. ... That makes NO sense. If FOSS applications were equal to that of the closed source realm, people would be using them regardless of whether piracy was possible.

Re:So uncool

[MindStalker]

What he means is that there are a LOT of people who are using pirated versions of Windows who would switch to something free if they couldn't pirate windows anymore. There is a huge percent of the population of the world who simply can NOT pay $200+ for an OS for their personal computers. Most of China for example, and plenty of places in the US as well. Nowadays you can get a computer for $400 or so from Dell with Windows installed, but in the past when building your own computer was cheaper, there were a lot of people who the $200 difference in adding an OS would have simply opted to have no computer at all.

Re:So uncool

[clickclickdrone]

That makes NO sense

I'm not so sure. There are a lot of reasonably savvy people who are basically just lazy. Got a new PC? Off to your fav. appz source to grab the latest MS Office, XP Pro (probably Vista RTM now), Nero, Photoshop CS etc. If suddenly it becomes impossible to find those, they'll be happy with 80-90% of the functionality at 0% of the price by doing a bit of research, hunting around then grabbing the closest equivalent free versions.
There are a significant number of people who used pirate software through collage when they're broke, get used to them then when they're financially better off, start to buy the real thing. You'll start losing those sales if they start off with free software right from thr word go.

Re:So uncool

[Divebus]

It will be just as effective as the FBI warnings on all DVDs. That's not a deterrent. Shutting off your OS remotely is a deterrent for the user - a deterrent from using the OS to start with, that is. I wonder which Einstein® thought this one up?

Re:Children Must Be Educated

[GravelordBocephus]

There's a big difference between being educated, and being educated by Microsoft. Educated would be "it's against the law to infringe copyright". Microsoft's so-called education would probably be "large corporations have the natural right to the ideas produced by their employees, it's perfectly acceptable to cripple software and mandate constant surveillance to make sure that your copy of Windows BS is completely above the board, trusted computing is only to protect content creators and only denies access to your computer you don't really need anyway..." and so on and so forth.
Microsoft educating children about copyright makes about as much sense as letting wolves teach sheep about nutrition.

Reduced functionality

[Threni]

How is the average user going to know if they have been placed in `reduced functionality mode`, or are simply experiencing the usual inability to shut down their PC (yes, even on XP), virus attacks, confusing USB installation (do I install the hardware first and then the drivers, or the drivers first, or plug the hardware in and see what happens, or what, exactly?), games juddering and freezing (presumably updating my file indexes or checking for updates is so important that the flippers in my pinball game can take up to half a second to respond) etc?

It ain't over yet

[Dekortage]

From the article: "The antipiracy fight is a multimillion-dollar effort, Hartje said. Although it has been going on for some time, Microsoft can't say whether the fight is paying off. 'This is a multi-inning game. We're in the first inning and it is too early to tell what the long-term impact will be,' she said."

This is the first inning? C'mon, pirated software was online (BBSs) in the 1980s, if not earlier, and even then I could buy illegally-copied software from semi-shady PC hobby stores. Forget "don't copy that floppy" -- how about "don't copy that data cassette" or "this software download will take 16 hours on your 1200 baud modem, assuming your housemates don't pick up the phone and disrupt the signal".

Nah, it's more like double-death overtime, and Microsoft is losing.

Re:Good for them!

[Zonk (troll)]

Oh, wait... did the OP mean copyright infringement? Then why did the OP use a term that means armed taking of actual property?

<corporate_asshat>
Because downloading a torrent is exactly the same as attacking a ship, killing it's crew and doing random raping and pillaging. Only dirty hippies that hate America can't see that.
</corporate_asshat>

Copyright infringement != piracy
Copyright infringement != theft
Copyright infringement == Copyright infringement

Doesn't make it right, but be accurate when using a damn word.

I've heard of this...

[staticdaze]

can put unvalidated copies of the software into a reduced-functionality mode

Why is this news? This has been done for a while; it's called crippleware [wikipedia.org]. Microsoft just seems to have implemented their own version of it, which will probably suffer the same fate as all other protection mechanisms.

History repeats itself

[UnknowingFool]

Remember when some soccer moms were up in arms about music lyrics? The result: all CDs with questionable lyrics got slapped with a little label. And that drove the kids to them. Nothing like saying to a child that they can't have something to make them more curious about it and want to try it.

Re:So uncool

[CrazedWalrus]

That's not a matter of not needing Windows, that's a matter of someone not needing a desktop PC at all.

That's true of most computer owners. When computers moved away from the scientific/business user and into the mainstream, they became vastly overcomplicated and expensive for the purposes they generally serve. My Blackberry does most of what people do with their computers, but the interface is a little cramped, which is where your idea comes in.

It seems like WebTV was probably a great idea that was simply before its time. Here to fill the niche now is task-specific Linux desktops (Internet client, Business Workstation, Scientific Workstation, Audio Pro workstation, etc), where a given distro has pre-defined package sets to fill the most likely needs of a given class of user. I think that's why people need to stop shying away from trying to convert people to "Linux on the Desktop", and to start looking for classes of users where this is feasible. A big niche is the web browser/email/IM types who just use their computer as a communication device, and this niche is easily filled by Linux.

Re:Good for them!

[Bert64]

Actually, copyright infringement is a god given right.
There's nothing in the ten commandments about not duplicating work. It does say thou shalt not steal, but stealing refers to depriving someone else of the item you've stolen, which isn't the case when producing a duplicate.

Copyright is an invention of modern law, intended to stifle the competition which would exist in a free market where anyone can produce duplicate copies of a work. It is so some people can make more money in the short term, while reducing the exposure of their media in the long term (no free copying means it will be distributed far less widely).

When an artist paints a work, how many people produce copies of it, and reprints etc, how many millions of copies of the mona lisa exist? If you want to make money from your work, sell the original, copies should be free for others to produce and distribute for the betterment of society as a whole.

Re:So uncool

[PopeRatzo]

If Microsoft, and the rest, reduced their prices by an order of magnitude, they'd find a lot less people getting their software from illegitimate sources.

I might be the most anti-DRM/anti-Intellectual Property person around here, but this argument that a company should lower its prices to discourage stealing is ridiculous. You're saying that because Rolex charges $5k for a watch, then it's OK to steal one.

Microsoft can charge what they want for a product and you can decide whether or not to buy it. Or, you can decide to pirate a copy, but please don't justify stealing by presenting yourself as a crusader against high-prices. [by the way, I'm not saying necessarily that I believe using a hacked version of Windows is stealing]

I'm also not one of the "free-market" types, but the best way to get Microsoft to lower prices would be to have some competition in the marketplace that competes on price-point (which leaves Apple out).

Linux does that to a certain extent, but it's not enough.

Re:So uncool

[aussie_a]

I might be the most anti-DRM/anti-Intellectual Property person around here, but this argument that a company should lower its prices to discourage stealing is ridiculous. You're saying that because Rolex charges $5k for a watch, then it's OK to steal one.

I find your claim to be anti-IP while still equating copyright infringement with stealing ridiculous.

Re:Give us more than ONE FREAKIN KEY

[Technician]

Why charge nearly 1000 dollars so they can all "upgrade" for a single house?

A simple site license would be fine. MS office was a couple hundred dollars a copy a few years ago. Novel's Star office was less than a hundred dollars and came with a home site license. Needless to say, I ran Star Office at home for a while until Open Office became better and replaced it.

In keeping the budget balanced and avoiding piracy, many people find alternatives with better terms. We have more than 1 PC. A single PC license is to be avoided if at all possible. This requirement alone has introduced me to Free Open Software as an affordable replacement to the by each PC a copy model.

The latest casualty is Light Factory. They went from a Registeration name model to a single PC locked registration. In the process, it broke the hot spare for a live performance. I upgraded to Freestyler in its place.

Is free software the only ones who get a SOHO network and a cheap site license?

Re:So uncool

[vertinox]

A 9 or 10-year-old would be much more likely to accept their propaganda than, say, a 14-year-old.

So how is that D.A.R.E. program working out?

Re:So uncool

[TimTheFoolMan]

It seems to me that the GP didn't say that the high price made stealing OK. They merely said that reducing the price would reduce piracy. Look at AutoCAD. You can make a very strong argument that one of the primary reasons for its market position is because they looked the other way at piracy, while keeping the price ridiculously high. They got market share from piracy, and outrageous revenue from "honest" users.

Sound familiar? - Tim

Re:So uncool

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"I might be the most anti-DRM/anti-Intellectual Property person around here, but this argument that a company should lower its prices to discourage stealing is ridiculous. You're saying that because Rolex charges $5k for a watch, then it's OK to steal one."

Unfortunately the argument is not as simple as that. The 'protection' put in place hurts the legitimate customer. Imagine if said Rolex decided to stop working because for reasons unknown to you it no longer saw you as its rightful owner. You paid $5k for this new Rolex and the older models never had this functionality before. Then, the line they feed you is "It's to keep prices down!" What are you going to say besides "Really? The price is the same as it has always been!" ?? The result is that stolen Rolexes with that feature removed are going to go up in demand.

Microsoft wants to combat piracy, right? How's that supposed to work if Windows becomes a bigger annoyance to those that paid for it? There's no justification of 'stealing' here, it's about Microsoft handling this in an unproductive way.

Re:So uncool

[gad_zuki!]

>Imagine a cell phone cradle that supported a keyboard/mouse/monitor console.

Okay. It will need a video chipset to drive at least a 1024x768 display. At least 256megs of ram. Wifi. USB controller. Local storage of say 4 gigs minumum. A decent OS. Apps.

Now its 4x as big, 4x as expensive, and ugly.

A quick look at dell's site shows me a PC can be had for 500 dollars which comes with a 19inch LCD, 60gig drive, 512megs of ram.

Why would anyone get a super-phone? Hell, I have a treo and love it, but its not for everyone. Its very limiting and very expensive. Phones are seen as almost disposable portable devices. Losing one isnt the end of the world. Losing this is. There goes all the data, bookmarks, photos, etc.

The cheap dell sits safely in the living room with a great screen and enough power to last more than a couple years for the casual user.

Re:So uncool

[shawn(at)fsu]

There is a huge percent of the population of the world who simply can NOT pay $200+ for an OS for their personal computers.
But yet they can pay for the computer?

Re:Good for them!

[cliffski]

oh please. I'm not trying to force anything on anyone. 99% of the world know that taking something that doesn't belong to you, thats priced, without paying, is wrong. If you are determined to stay in the 1%, then that's up to you, but don't expect the other 99% of us to consider you anything other than a freeloader.

Re:So uncool

[arminw]

....Software is simply overpriced......

As with any item of commerce, don't buy it if you cannot or will not afford it. Until someone invents an atomic duplicator, it will always cost considerably more to make a copy of some tangible hardware. Software is a product of mind. All such pure mind products, especially digital ones, are intrinsically easily and inexpensively copied, without any great additional expenditure of money or effort. Acquiring the fruit of someone else's effort, whether that effort is physical or mental, without paying the one putting forth such effort is called stealing. If someone has a kid mow their lawn for an agreed price, and then doesn't pay, that person has stolen from that kid. If a particular kid wants more than you are willing to pay, you can find another one who will do it for a lower price or mow the lawn yourself.

Writing software requires effort and expense. The people who wrote that software deserve to be paid for that effort. Copying software without paying for the mental effort it took to write, IS *STEALING*, morally speaking, and also illegal as in copyright law violation.

Re:So uncool

[LanMan04]

You're saying that because Rolex charges $5k for a watch, then it's OK to steal one.

Or, you can decide to pirate a copy, but please don't justify stealing by presenting yourself as a crusader against high-prices.

Wow, you're an idiot.

He's not saying pirating is OK because the price is expensive, he's *MAKING A PREDICTION* that if Microsoft were to lower their prices, less people would pirate their products. That's almost certainly true, morals (which *you* brought up) aside.

I don't adovocate stealing intellectual property..

[windowpain]

But the little comic book-like video says that by using authentic software "You get: The assurance that your IT infrastructure is clean and stable"

Oh really? Who provides that assurance? Certainly not Microsoft. I don't recall ever seeing any MS product (or any piece of software, for that matter) that isn't sold without a warranty including the implied warranty of merchantability. In other words the EULA plainly states the software is completely worthless and that by clicking through, you agree with the manufacturer that the software is completely worthless and that you are surrendering your right to sue them if the software destroys your computer, blows up you house and kills your family etc. etc.

Like I said, I don't advocate stealing intellectual property but turning in criminals who copy and distribute what a manufacturer publicly declares is worthless crap is waaaaay down on my list of wrongs to right.

Re:Didn't stop Joe Camel

[Pojut]

Kids don't smoke because some cartoon named "Mr. Camel Smoking Guy on a Box" tells them to. They smoke for the same reasons adults do; it's a stiumlant and certain brands taste damn good (not saying they SMELL good, saying they TASTE good...to quote Bill Hicks, "It's a shame it's that second hand smoke that smells, the shit we're suckin' down is fantastic!"