22% of Windows Installs Non-Genuine

[The Highlander]

22% of Windows Installs Non-Genuine

 

Microsoft disclosed Monday that over one in five Windows installations were deemed non-genuine through the company's Windows Genuine Advantage program, which requires users to validate their operating system before downloading updates from the company.

 

Since WGA launched in July 2005, over 512 million users have attempted to validate their copy of Windows, Microsoft said. Of those, the non-genuine rate was 22.3 percent. 56,000 reports have been made by customers of counterfeit software, which grants that user a free replacement copy of Windows.

 

While high, that number is less than the average software piracy rate around the world, according to the Business Software Alliance. The BSA reports that 35 percent of the world's software is pirated (22 percent in North America specifically), and a Yankee Group study noted that 55 percent of organizations report instances of counterfeit or pirated software.

 

As it prepares to launch both Windows Vista and Office 2007 to the public next week, Microsoft has kicked off what it calls the "Genuine Fact Files" campaign for educating consumers on the downfall and risks associated with non-genuine software. It hopes to discourage users from downloading illicit software in the process.

 

Acknowledging that potential customers may be tempted to "try the new products first before they make the decision to buy" through the use of pirated software, Microsoft has posted an online "test drive" of Windows Vista, which joins an existing Web-based preview of Office 2007.

 

The Vista test drive, which requires Internet Explorer 6 or 7 and runs the operating system in a small Active X based virtual machine, lets visitors explore various new features of the forthcoming operating system, and guides them through common tasks. Meanwhile, a 60-day trial download of Office 2007 is also available.

 

Link Found here

http://www.betanews.com/article/22_of_Wind...uine/1169497163

[Beerman]

Way more than I would have thought. Why on earth would someone want to run their system with a hacked or non genuine OS? Nevermind!

[grandpabruce]

Way more than I would have thought. Why on earth would someone want to run their system with a hacked or non genuine OS? Nevermind!

 

I have no clue why they would, outside of being cheap so and so's.

[wraithtdk]

Reasons for using non-genuine copies of Windows:

 

1. "The Computer Show Buyer": these folks usually don't even KNOW they are running non-genuine installs. See, in a lot of places, every once in a while there are the PC equivelant of a gun show. A big convention hall hosts it and anyone can buy space and put up shop. Guys buy a bunch of bargain-basement parts, slap them together, and prey on people's ignorance (if there are big numbers in the stats, it's gotta be good, right?). And what's installed on it? If you said a volume-licensed copy XP Pro, well, gold star to you.

 

2. "The upgrader": This reason becomes less valid the longer an OS is out, but these are the guys who are still running the system they had that came with Windows ME, and they just don't have a couple hundred bucks to drop on a new OS. "But if they can't afford it, they shouldn't be using it", yea, that's easy to say. But on the other hand, if they honestly don't have the money, it really wouldn't matter if they were running ME or XP, Microsoft would not be getting anything from them either way. I actually fell into this category when XP came out. I was working as a meat carver at the Golden Coral. Never more than $80.00 in my bank account, living paycheck to paycheck, I pirated XP for six months until I could afford it.

 

3. The aforementioned "try before you buy" guy: Some software has trial versions where you can sample the entire product for a certain amount of time. OS's typically do not. And let's not kid ourselves here, seeing an interactive slideshow, or using a java/activeX web-based demo that shows what the OS looks like under the most ideal of circumstances just isn't going to do it. I do on-site tech support work, and I can tell you that a LOT of people are planning to waith out the first year untill the "retail beta" period is over, because they are not sure if there machine can handle it, if it will work with their hardware, if it's going to conflict with that old scanner, if their copy of Lotus Notes is going to work, etc. Yes, there are hardware specs out there to go by. But keep in mind the minimum system requirements for XP included 128MB of ram, and the "recomended" ammount (which most novice users took to mean "this will make it run just fine!") was 256MB.

 

 

 

4. The lost disk people: Pretty simple, really. They had a computer with a legal copy of XP, but they lost the OS disk and don't want to spend $200-$299 on a new copy, when the one they had would have remained legal had something they downloaded from Microsoft update crashed the thing.

 

 

 

 

 

The bottom line is this: there's no question that piracy is illegal. But the right and wrong of the matter far less cut and dried as the "OMG YOU'RE A THIEF!" corporate hyping would have you believe. And some of these "Genuine facts" things are anything but.

[gi7omy]

4. The lost disk people: Pretty simple, really. They had a computer with a legal copy of XP, but they lost the OS disk and don't want to spend $200-$299 on a new copy, when the one they had would have remained legal had something they downloaded from Microsoft update crashed the thing.

 

That one doesn't actually wash - it's not the media that the OS came on that's pirate - it's the key. I have lost or damaged legit copies before now and it's very simple to get hold of another disc, copy that and install it - using the legit key I do have.

 

You are legally entitled to have a back-up copy of computer programs (I do wish someone would tell certain companies that and get them to stop sticking 'copy-protection' on their games, but that's a different package of red herrings).

[lynn98109]

That one doesn't actually wash - it's not the media that the OS came on that's pirate - it's the key. I have lost or damaged legit copies before now and it's very simple to get hold of another disc, copy that and install it - using the legit key I do have.

 

You are legally entitled to have a back-up copy of computer programs pb](I do wish someone would tell certain companies that and get them to stop sticking 'copy-protection' on their games, but that's a different package of red herrings).[/b]

I once knew someone (with a loud voice) who every day at the start of work would discuss the latest games he had tried - and included in the one-sided discussion was how he had learned that he could rent, burn, return the discs. He had completely discarded the idea of actually BUYING the games. I think that's why.

 

Lynn

[wraithtdk]

That one doesn't actually wash - it's not the media that the OS came on that's pirate - it's the key. I have lost or damaged legit copies before now and it's very simple to get hold of another disc, copy that and install it - using the legit key I do have.

 

You are legally entitled to have a back-up copy of computer programs (I do wish someone would tell certain companies that and get them to stop sticking 'copy-protection' on their games, but that's a different package of red herrings).

 

1: On retail copies of the software, the key is printed on the cardboard folder that the disk comes in. Most people who have lost their retail copy have also lost their disk.

 

2. The "you can make a backup of what you own" is a very common misconception, due in no small part to the "disclaimer" that warez dealers used to put up on their site. By the letter of the law, unless explicitly stated otherwise, you can't copy copyrighted software, period. People have tried the personal backup defense in court. It's yet to wash.

[gi7omy]

Again, not quite accurate. This is from an Australian legal site (and is part of the Berne Convention which is supposed to be covered by US law)

 

"...Under the Copyright Act, there is a narrow exception which allows the making of

back-up copies of computer programs, for the purpose of replacing the original if the

original gets mucked up. There are some problems with the section, as it isn’t clear

whether you can make a back up of a backup, and the section doesn’t appear to

extend to copyright material within the program (such as literary works in the

Help file)...."

 

Confusing isn't it

[wraithtdk]

Again, not quite accurate. This is from an Australian legal site (and is part of the Berne Convention which is supposed to be covered by US law)

 

"...Under the Copyright Act, there is a narrow exception which allows the making of

back-up copies of computer programs, for the purpose of replacing the original if the

original gets mucked up. There are some problems with the section, as it isn't clear

whether you can make a back up of a backup, and the section doesn't appear to

extend to copyright material within the program (such as literary works in the

Help file)...."

 

Confusing isn't it

 

Hey all I know is:

 

1. I've heard the law quoted many times. I've yet to hear any of the "legal experts" quoting it to give me a "law code" or whatever they call it (you know, subsection b of penal code number yadda yadda yadda)

 

and more importantly

 

2. It's yet to fly in court. Probably because once you've lot the original disk, you have no proof that you ever bought it it, and if you keep all your software in one of those case logic binders that holds a few hundred discs, and you loose that, but made backups of everything, what are the feds gonna find in your place?

 

 

 

That's right. Three hundred burned copies of software with no sign of a retail copy.

[The Highlander]

If you have a day free or so , get out the elua copy that came with your Microsoft windows disk, or any other MS product, and read it....

 

In short , by opening the pack or installing the software you agree to the turms of the Elua, and as it actuly states in the Elua,

 

1. you have no rights on the use or licence of the software

2. you dont own the software and have a limited right to use it only.

3. by using it, MS have the rights to change the rules of the use at any time.

 

so at the end of the day (and under law) (Microsoft Law)

 

YOU ARE WRONG NO MATTER WHAT...

 

read it ... this is not a joke... its in the ELUA

[gi7omy]

The biggest joke there actually is that until you actually OPEN the thing - you don't even SEE the EULA.

 

Now how legal that particular bit of flummery is is another thing that hasn't been tested in a court

 

How can it be said that you 'agreed' to something that you actually weren't able to read BEFORE it was assumed you agreed to it?

 

However - it doesn't stipulate you can't make a copy for backup purposes (at least I never found that in all the gobbledegook)

[wraithtdk]

The biggest joke there actually is that until you actually OPEN the thing - you don't even SEE the EULA.

 

Now how legal that particular bit of flummery is is another thing that hasn't been tested in a court

 

How can it be said that you 'agreed' to something that you actually weren't able to read BEFORE it was assumed you agreed to it?

 

However - it doesn't stipulate you can't make a copy for backup purposes (at least I never found that in all the gobbledegook)

 

They don't have to put that in the EULA, because it's built into the copyright law.

[gi7omy]

Wraith - actually it's under the Berne Convention which the US is (well supposed to) signed up along with other countries. US legislation regarding software is supposed to concur with it, but, as I pointed out in an earlier post, the question of non-application stuff is not well covered. This has the status of an international treaty

 

My attitude - until a court says it's illegal, it's still legal and no court yet HAS said that backing up s/w is illegal. Pirating is illegal, sure - but back-up for personal use?

[wraithtdk]

Wraith - actually it's under the Berne Convention which the US is (well supposed to) signed up along with other countries. US legislation regarding software is supposed to concur with it, but, as I pointed out in an earlier post, the question of non-application stuff is not well covered. This has the status of an international treaty

 

Really? Can you point out which article for me? Because I searched the full text of the Berne Convention, and neither "backup" nor "personal" came up. As I said before, it's long been my understanding that the "it's o.k. as long as it's for the purpose of a personal backup" was kind of like "if you're a cop, you have to tell me". IE something made up by a particular type of criminal to protect himself, despite the fact that it's not actually true and and will actually protect him about as well as a suit of cardboard armor.

[gi7omy]

Article 9.2

 

"...(2) It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the Union to permit the reproduction of such works in certain special cases, provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author...."

 

A backup copy of legitimate software for your own use does not prejudice the legitimate rights of the owner.

 

As I said before - until a court says it's illegal, it's legal. We haven't (well we shouldn't have) reached a situation where it becomes 'you're guilty until proven innocent'

[tbrewst]

I've been reading all this and I'm going to throw this in:

Can I backup my computer software?

Yes, under certain conditions as provided by section 117 of the Copyright Act. Although the precise term used under section 117 is “archival” copy, not “backup” copy, these terms today are used interchangeably. This privilege extends only to computer programs and not to other types of works. Under section 117, you or someone you authorize may make a copy of an original computer program if:

 

• the new copy is being made for archival (i.e., backup) purposes only;
  
• you are the legal owner of the copy; and
  
• any copy made for archival purposes is either destroyed, or transferred with the original copy, once the original copy is sold, given away, or otherwise transferred.
  

You are not permitted under section 117 to make a backup copy of other material on a computer's hard drive, such as other copyrighted works that have been downloaded (e.g., music, films).

 

It is also important to check the terms of sale or license agreement of the original copy of software in case any special conditions have been put in place by the copyright owner that might affect your ability or right under section 117 to make a backup copy. There is no other provision in the Copyright Act that specifically authorizes the making of backup copies of works other than computer programs even if those works are distributed as digital copies.

 

Here's a link to section 117:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/usc...17----000-.html

[Beerman]

Thanks for the link Terry. I'll get back to you after I finish law school but first, I have to start law school.

This just shows how ridiculous most of this is. Most of these laws exists so that more lawyers can exist (apologies to the lawyers present and past).