backtop

Software Microsoft WGA Lawsuit #2
Brandon Hill (Blog) - July 5, 2006 10:10 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 44 comment(s) - last by gtnbuckeye.. on Jul 11 at 10:58 AM
The hits just keep coming

Microsoft is facing yet another lawsuit over its Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA) antipiracy software. This time, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Microsoft in the U.S. District Court in Seattle. The plaintiffs’ complaints in this case mirror those of a suit filed last week. InfoWorld reports:

The new suit lists its plaintiff as Engineered Process Controls and Univex, along with citizens Edward Misfud, David DiDomizio, and Martin Sifuentes, who are listed as owners of licensed copies of Windows XP running WGA. The suit alleges WGA is spyware and that Microsoft misled consumers by labeling it as a critical security update. The plaintiffs maintain Microsoft did not make users aware that WGA frequently contacted its central servers.

Microsoft has already released a new version of its WGA utility which doesn't phone home as often and released instructions on how to remove the older WGA software from machines through some registry editing. Some programmers have even gone so far as to release a small software utility which removes the software without users having to weed through the Windows registry.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Oh they will get it soon
By vingamm on 7/5/2006 1:35:35 PM , Rating: 2
I understand them wanting to protect there IPs, but the WGA program is VERY intrusive. Hopefully enough suits will be filed that M$ will see that it is not profitable to continue to program. I think the next step is to get them to divulge how much information they have access to in your PC.

Some of us work on sensitive material and have IPs of our own that we would rather keep private. I think it is very unfair that we neither know how or how deep WGA can probe our systems.

From a personal experience, I have had to apply for two brand new licenses because I made radical upgrades to and sold a PC and kept my WinXP. Only to find that my license was deemed pirated. That in it self could be a suit. The countless hours lost because this ineffectual software requires you to prove you are legit. I say keep it coming they will learn




RE: Oh they will get it soon
By masher2 (blog) on 7/5/2006 1:53:20 PM , Rating: 1
> "Some of us work on sensitive material and have IPs of our own that we would rather keep private."

I hate to confuse you with the facts, but if you have auto-update on, you're sending Microsoft your IP address every time it checks for an update. There's nothing new in WGA in this regard.

> I have had to apply for two brand new licenses because I made radical upgrades to and sold a PC and kept my WinXP. Only to find that my license was deemed pirated. That in it self could be a suit...

Yes. A suit by Microsoft against you, for violating the OEM license agreement. But don't worry, I doubt they'll take action against you.


RE: Oh they will get it soon
By Gooberslot on 7/5/2006 6:19:36 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, M$ phones home even if you turn auto updates off. The only way to make it stop is to disable the service.


RE: Oh they will get it soon
By Gooberslot on 7/5/2006 6:21:05 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, replace M$ with Windows. I should have proofread before posting.


RE: Oh they will get it soon
By allnighter on 7/5/2006 2:15:03 PM , Rating: 3
lol, masher2 , I believe he meant I ntelectual P roperty, not the IP address, in this case.
Think before you drink man.


RE: Oh they will get it soon
By masher2 (blog) on 7/5/2006 4:07:53 PM , Rating: 1
> "I believe he meant I ntelectual P roperty, not the IP address..."

I believe that, given IP addresses are sent via WGA, not Intellectual Property, and further given the syntax of his statement, "some of us have IPs of our own", his meaning was clear.


RE: Oh they will get it soon
By vingamm on 7/5/2006 4:54:07 PM , Rating: 2
You know I think Masher has a personal thing with me. I do not know why but he tries to correct everything I put on this board. I purposefully abbreviated that just to see if he would bite. Brainiac, I do know what an IP address is LOL.


RE: Oh they will get it soon
By vingamm on 7/5/2006 5:03:26 PM , Rating: 2
Oh and one last thing, If I had ever bought an OEM copy of XP then that might be an arguement but, I would love for you to show me in any part of the LA (licensing Agreement in case you take issue with that abbreviation) that says you can not upgrade your PC and you can not sell the PC and retain your software provided that you wipe the other hard drive first. M$ is licensed to the user not the hardware bozo unless you have applied for a per seat license. Next you will say you worked for M$ and you wrote part of the agreement.


RE: Oh they will get it soon
By masher2 (blog) on 7/5/2006 5:10:52 PM , Rating: 1
> "I do not know why but he tries to correct everything I put on this board..."

A desire for correctness and accuracy, primarily.

> "I purposefully abbreviated that just to see if he would bite..."

Nice try, but your phrasing was incorrect if you intended "IP" to mean intellectual property:

quote:
...I understand them wanting to protect there IPs...some of us work on sensitive material and have IPs of our own that we would rather keep private.


Given you pluralized "IP" in both cases, either you meant it as "IP address", or your skills in the English language are seriously lacking. I gave you the benefit of the doubt; was I wrong to do so?

Furthermore, coming from someone who develops intellectual property for a living, I think I can safely say that referring to it as simply "IP" in the context of a program that collects IP addresses, is ambigous and misleading enough to be judged incorrect in its own right, regardless of syntax.

Ah, but you just meant to fool me into responding, even though I had not yet responded to you once in this thread? I see...you think anyone will buy it?


RE: Oh they will get it soon
By masher2 (blog) on 7/5/2006 5:31:29 PM , Rating: 2
> "You know I think Masher has a personal thing with me..."

Interestingly enough, according to the forum log, the very first post you've made to this board was the one I corrected. So it seems obvious that, not only are you posting under multiple names, you're assuming I can telepathically connect them?



Please read - Both sides....
By Gelde3001 on 7/6/2006 12:12:51 AM , Rating: 2
Id like you ALL to stop and think about this for one moment - Had WGA been part of the launch of WinXP then who would have argued except the pirates ?.....

It is however being forced at the END of XP's lifecycle, and having an opt out tick on an auto update is NOT opt in, esp if you arent informed at all or made aware. Having to check it yourself and make a choice to deny it being downloaded or installed is lunacy.

This is a cheap stunt which is designed to boost revenues whilst vista is finished late and also will subtly force people to consider Vista if they "have" to now pay for another windows or pay at all depending on their circumstances (pirate / idiot). Also consider that it will be a given that vista will ship with a seriously beefed up WGA that will almost certainly cripple any pc found to be outside its checks.

Finally - do you not realise that once Vista ships the current XP WGA will be updated to bring the 30-day or less time limit into play - again to force a payment or more likely a purchase of a slightly discounted Vista Basic.

I have legal copies of my OS and dont want flames etc but please understand there are much larger corporate ideals at play here. The XP uptake was and still is (barring new pc's) quite low - as for the 99% of people use XP, not even half - the ammount of business users that HAVE to still run 9x systems is quite astounding - schools even - the actual usage of XP is more like 55-60% at the absolute maximum worldwide and Vista will only be less because it will really require a new pc to actually be of any use to most people at all. After all a flashy 3D interface that wont run on 85% of machines at present isnt going to sell well at retail. Do understand that Microsoft knows this all to well and have tried several tactics to perseude people onto the latest and greated - compatibility with games is a big point for me personally with the latest finally requiring XP due to 2 hex bits added to exe files.

Im only asking you to think outside the I dont personally mind - or I bloody well hate it camps......There is always more at play behind the scenes.

Id love XP or Vista to be free - but on this planet only life will ever be free in its existance.




RE: Please read - Both sides....
By bobdelt on 7/6/2006 6:57:06 AM , Rating: 2
Thank you captain obvious. But that doesn't change my opinion. And I think you highly underestimate how many people use XP. Most companies have better than a five year turnover rate on hardware and unless theyre using Linux, they will have xp on their machines.


RE: Please read - Both sides....
By Wonga on 7/6/2006 9:10:54 AM , Rating: 2
In the schools I have to go into, most PCs are on XP now and the few that are still running 98 are due to be ditched within a few months.

The XP uptake is MASSIVE, for the very reason you mentioned - it ships with new PCs. Only a small minority of people go and buy a retail version (for various reasons, such as "Don't need to" etc).

Yes, people might think about going and buying a copy of Windows now they've seen the WPA message, but don't you realise that 99% of people who see this message have a pirated copy of Windows (whether it was their doing or the dodgy company they bought it from)?


RE: Please read - Both sides....
By masher2 (blog) on 7/6/2006 10:31:54 AM , Rating: 1
> "but don't you realise that 99% of people who see this message have a pirated copy of Windows (whether it was their doing or the dodgy company they bought it from)?"

I think its rather more like 99.9 have either a pirated copy, compromised license key, or some other issue. But the people complaining against WGA are, by and large, the usual suspects who don't really believe in copyright law at all, the same people who account for the 50%+ of all Internet traffic in the way of P2P pirated music, video, and software.

In their minds, if they managed to get a copy of Windows activated and running on their PC-- its theirs. And any inconvenient little issues about illegal licensing should all be water under the bridge.



Who is masher2 anyway?
By kondor999 on 7/6/2006 11:07:45 PM , Rating: 1
I don't know who masher2 is, but he really does stick up for the end-user, doesn't he? I mean, his views are always so balanced!

Seriously, man, are you a cop or something? Or maybe a lawyer? Or a corporate sycophant? Or a Troll?

One thing's for sure -- you aren't getting laid enough. All that irritability and way too much time to argue with just about everyone here. My guess is that, in real life, you don't get a lot of respect.

Sorry.


RE: Who is masher2 anyway?
By masher2 (blog) on 7/7/2006 9:42:07 AM , Rating: 1
> "I don't know who masher2 is, but he really does stick up for the end-user..."

No, I'm "sticking up" for principles. Capitalism, freedom, and basic property rights. The principles the nation was founded upon. Why not try it yourself sometime?

> "Seriously, man, are you a cop or something? Or maybe a lawyer? Or a corporate sycophant? Or a Troll?"

Taking debate lessons from Joseph Goebbels, eh? I'm sure he would be proud.

> "One thing's for sure -- you aren't getting laid enough"

Invariably, I find people who make such statements are underpaid striplings who believe "great sex" consists of nightly donning beer googles to romance pasty-faced heifers at the local bar and grill.



RE: Who is masher2 anyway?
By gtnbuckeye on 7/7/2006 2:48:14 PM , Rating: 2
I love capitalism and free markets. Unfortunately, Microsoft operates from a monopoly position, and I question wether some of Microsofts business practices would survive a truly competitive market.

Yes, there are many competitors in the software industry, but the desktop OS and office suite markets are certainly not competitive. Who's Microsoft's next closest competitor? What's that competitor's market share? When one company has >95% of the market, I think the argument of competitive or not goes out the window.

When I buy a car, television, or refrigerator, I know who the various manufacturers are and I compare features that differentiate products to determine which product I'll buy. When buying software the reasoning most people use is "that's what we use at work", or "that's what I learned how to use", or "you mean there's something other than Microsoft?". Yes, you could classify as features the fact that "everyone else uses it" or that "I know how to use it", but those aren't clear proof that Microsoft builds a better mouse trap. Most people are clueless about who the competition even is, let alone what the feature differences are between competing products. So, software markets are dominated by customers and end users that purchase based on a lack of information, and a lack of education to understand that information. These are not the telltale signs of a "competitive market".

Notice that Microsoft has a smaller share of the market in server software, web servers, etc. Why? Is it a coincidence that those in a position to purchase and use this software are typically better informed and educated on the products and features (and therefore LESS likely to be afraid to "not buy Microsoft").

My question to you is: If the desktop OS (or office suite) market were truly competitive, would all of the "nonsense" (such as WGA) Microsoft imposes on it's customers continue?

I have installed other commercial operating systems (Linux, Netware) and office suites (Corel Office), and not had to deal with many of the nonsensical issues encountered in Microsofts software. (No "phone home", or license key to enter with any of these products, and I can install and uninstall as I deem necessary - no need to call India like I have to when Windows XP activation fails during a reinstall after replacing a failed hard drive. Heck, my old Corel Office suite allowed me to take my work software and install an additional copy of it on one home PC as part of the license agreement!) If Microsoft were not in a position of monopoly power on the desktop (as their competitors clearly are not), I think many of the these "restrictions" and other goofiness (WGA) would not exist. This would indicate that there is a potential "abuse" situation occuring that would not be possible in a competitive market.

I don't begrudge Microsoft the opportunity to climb to the top of their industry, nor the right to fight to stay there. But I don't like being taken advantage of, and in a capitalist economy a buyer surely has the right to have expectations of the seller. Usually, though, the buyer has a real option of choosing a different seller (which is the free market economy's built-in way of eliminating seller abuses). Since this is not a competitive market, the seller is trying to get away with some shenanigans, and the buyers only recourse is the mechanisms provided by government (either legislative/regulations, or judicial/lawsuites). Personally, I hate turning to the government to resolve problems - it usually means something in the system has already failed to work properly, and is now only going to get worse. ;-)

You can blindly respond "it's capitalism, it's capitalism" all you want, but it's capitalism operating in a "broken" fashion. The beauty of capitalism is that it is so darned efficient at automatically allocating resources through the balancing of supply and demand...as long as everything is "working right" (i.e.- no monopolies or other dominating market power scenarios). The drawback then is that under monopolistic conditions (which fortunately only appear periodically, and in narrow market segments) capitalism can experience some of the same basic inefficiencies of a totilitarian socio-economic system (communism or facism, either one will fit), where the "seller" gets to dictate all terms to the "buyer".


RE: Who is masher2 anyway?
By ttowntom on 7/8/2006 11:29:36 AM , Rating: 2
My question to you is: If the desktop OS (or office suite) market were truly competitive, would all of the "nonsense" (such as WGA) Microsoft imposes on it's customers continue?

Easy answer-- yes, of course it would. I've used a few software packages (in markets with far more active competitors than desktop OSes) that are enormously more restrictive than WGA. Products which "phone home" every time you try to use them...and which, if they fail to obtain a valid key, shut down fully.

> Notice that Microsoft has a smaller share of the market in server software, web servers, etc. Why? "

Another easy answer. Because Microsoft began as a desktop OS. Its entry into the server market is relatively late.

Another important factor is that standardization is less critical in the server arena. Most servers are dedicated to one or two applications. As long as you have those applications working on your OS, you don't much care about interoperability, available of other software, or any other factors.

Is it a coincidence that those in a position to purchase and use this software are typically better informed and educated on the products and features (and therefore LESS likely to be afraid to "not buy Microsoft").



RE: Who is masher2 anyway?
By gtnbuckeye on 7/11/2006 10:58:04 AM , Rating: 2
My question to you is: If the desktop OS (or office suite) market were truly competitive, would all of the "nonsense" (such as WGA) Microsoft imposes on it's customers continue?

quote:
Easy answer-- yes, of course it would. I've used a few software packages (in markets with far more active competitors than desktop OSes) that are enormously more restrictive than WGA. Products which "phone home" every time you try to use them...and which, if they fail to obtain a valid key, shut down fully.


I have used such products also (CAD, statistics and analysis programs, industry specific tools, etc.), but nothing that would typically be used outside a business setting. This is less digestable because it is happening with "consumer" products - home users are far less tolerable of this than corporate users. (Hey, that's MY computer and data were talking about now!) Also, since those non-consumer product catagories are such low volume, compared to desktop OS and office suites, any piracy is more damaging to the bottom line, and the desire for more "harassing" measures to stop piracy are understandable (although still not acceptable) to me. The only other apps I've used with these "features" are security related (anti-virus, etc.) which by design have to phone somew