If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
I don't understand why anyone would buy free software.
What was the plan? Here is the article I just read. ^^E-waste recycler must serve 15-month sentence for selling discs with free Microsoft software ^^https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/25/1...ight-to-repair How can free software be $25 and how can you go to jail for that? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
On 26-Apr-18 10:30 AM, Bob J Jones wrote:
I don't understand why anyone would buy free software. What was the plan? Here is the article I just read. ^^E-waste recycler must serve 15-month sentence for selling discs with free Microsoft software ^^https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/25/1...ight-to-repair How can free software be $25 and how can you go to jail for that? This might make things clearer for you:- https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...restore_discs/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 10:36:54 +0100, David_B
wrote: On 26-Apr-18 10:30 AM, Bob J Jones wrote: I don't understand why anyone would buy free software. What was the plan? Here is the article I just read. ^^E-waste recycler must serve 15-month sentence for selling discs with free Microsoft software ^^https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/25/1...ight-to-repair How can free software be $25 and how can you go to jail for that? This might make things clearer for you:- https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...restore_discs/ Still doesn't make sense. Resellers are paying $25 for a restore disc you can download for free legally? why? Either there's a misplaced decimal point, or this is full version cost to resellers. Or is this about using the word 'authorized' when he should have used 'authentic?' |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 05:55:11 -0400, default wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 10:36:54 +0100, David_B wrote: On 26-Apr-18 10:30 AM, Bob J Jones wrote: I don't understand why anyone would buy free software. What was the plan? Here is the article I just read. ^^E-waste recycler must serve 15-month sentence for selling discs with free Microsoft software ^^https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/25/1...ight-to-repair How can free software be $25 and how can you go to jail for that? This might make things clearer for you:- https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...restore_discs/ Still doesn't make sense. Resellers are paying $25 for a restore disc you can download for free legally? why? Either there's a misplaced decimal point, or this is full version cost to resellers. Or is this about using the word 'authorized' when he should have used 'authentic?' The comments in El Reg make this all clear to those interested. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
default wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 10:36:54 +0100, David_B wrote: On 26-Apr-18 10:30 AM, Bob J Jones wrote: I don't understand why anyone would buy free software. What was the plan? Here is the article I just read. ^^E-waste recycler must serve 15-month sentence for selling discs with free Microsoft software ^^https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/25/1...ight-to-repair How can free software be $25 and how can you go to jail for that? This might make things clearer for you:- https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...restore_discs/ Still doesn't make sense. Resellers are paying $25 for a restore disc you can download for free legally? why? "Admin & shipping" fees? Aka profiteering. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
mechanic wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 05:55:11 -0400, default wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 10:36:54 +0100, David_B wrote: On 26-Apr-18 10:30 AM, Bob J Jones wrote: I don't understand why anyone would buy free software. What was the plan? Here is the article I just read. ^^E-waste recycler must serve 15-month sentence for selling discs with free Microsoft software ^^https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/25/1...ight-to-repair How can free software be $25 and how can you go to jail for that? This might make things clearer for you:- https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/0...restore_discs/ Still doesn't make sense. Resellers are paying $25 for a restore disc you can download for free legally? why? Either there's a misplaced decimal point, or this is full version cost to resellers. Or is this about using the word 'authorized' when he should have used 'authentic?' The comments in El Reg make this all clear to those interested. Arstechica has an article now on this, and I don't think we'll ever know what the guy did wrong, except he's getting jail time. The claim in that article, is that he was reproducing Dell discs. The article makes a reference to him "selling the discs to Dell refurbishers". What's a Dell refurbisher exactly ? That isn't explained. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...-go-to-prison/ https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...-DTKH-1-0.html "falsely told customers... that the Microsoft computer software available for sale was the re-install retail version" When apparently it was copies of some Dell discs. The legal document doesn't even bother to properly identify the Windows XP version of disc involved. The document has been hand edited to make some sort of correction, but still seems wrong to me. I bet if the prosecutor had phoned Dell, they could have provided a more accurate name string for the thing. Are courts really that sloppy ? Item 27 of the documentcloud document says "purpose... to defraud". So the charge is "(attempted) fraud" I guess. Not copyright infringement ? Not a trademark violation ? And the articles so far, haven't demonstrated how an actual customer received a mis-representation. It appeared to be scheming between two businessmen. There's no customer saying "this is not right, I was given a Dell PC with a Dell disc and...". I would have expected Microsoft to take exception to the resale of Dell OEM Royalty materials, but that's not claimed either. He's been generally naughty and must be spanked. "He's guilty of something, I just know it" and off to jail he goes. Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 20:25:25 -0400, Paul wrote:
Arstechica has an article now on this, and I don't think we'll ever know what the guy did wrong, except he's getting jail time. The claim in that article, is that he was reproducing Dell discs. The article makes a reference to him "selling the discs to Dell refurbishers". What's a Dell refurbisher exactly ? That isn't explained. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...-go-to-prison/ https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...-DTKH-1-0.html "falsely told customers... that the Microsoft computer software available for sale was the re-install retail version" When apparently it was copies of some Dell discs. The legal document doesn't even bother to properly identify the Windows XP version of disc involved. The document has been hand edited to make some sort of correction, but still seems wrong to me. I bet if the prosecutor had phoned Dell, they could have provided a more accurate name string for the thing. Are courts really that sloppy ? I haven't read any of the links that have been provided, but I just wanted to weigh in on the question directly above. In my admittedly limited experience, yes, the courts really are that sloppy. That's not to say that attorneys and clerks don't get it right eventually, but sometimes court filings seem to be submitted to meet a filing deadline, then they get amended one or more times afterwards until the content is mostly accurate. ....winston probably has an interesting perspective on the topic. I believe he said once that he works at, or is somehow involved with, a court somewhere. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
Char Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 20:25:25 -0400, Paul wrote: Arstechica has an article now on this, and I don't think we'll ever know what the guy did wrong, except he's getting jail time. The claim in that article, is that he was reproducing Dell discs. The article makes a reference to him "selling the discs to Dell refurbishers". What's a Dell refurbisher exactly ? That isn't explained. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...-go-to-prison/ https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...-DTKH-1-0.html "falsely told customers... that the Microsoft computer software available for sale was the re-install retail version" When apparently it was copies of some Dell discs. The legal document doesn't even bother to properly identify the Windows XP version of disc involved. The document has been hand edited to make some sort of correction, but still seems wrong to me. I bet if the prosecutor had phoned Dell, they could have provided a more accurate name string for the thing. Are courts really that sloppy ? I haven't read any of the links that have been provided, but I just wanted to weigh in on the question directly above. In my admittedly limited experience, yes, the courts really are that sloppy. That's not to say that attorneys and clerks don't get it right eventually, but sometimes court filings seem to be submitted to meet a filing deadline, then they get amended one or more times afterwards until the content is mostly accurate. ...winston probably has an interesting perspective on the topic. I believe he said once that he works at, or is somehow involved with, a court somewhere. After I posted that, it occurred to me that the outcome was really under Dell/Microsoft control. There were probably several legal instruments they could have used. By going to a prosecutor, the prosecutor "converted" the infraction into a criminal citation. Microsoft/Dell could have attempted to collect money from the adventure (if they thought the individual could be milked like a cow). By approaching the prosecutor, the prosecutor had to "cook up" an interpretation ("fraud") so a criminal trial, and/or a plea could take place. And that's why this individual is going to jail today - it's "cheaper" for Microsoft to have the prosecutor dispose of the individual, than to do it with their own posse of lawyers. Paul |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
In news
He's been generally naughty and must be spanked. "He's guilty of something, I just know it" and off to jail he goes. Paul Somewhere it says he was planning on selling the discs for 25 cents to refurbishers, who presumably would give them to the customer of the refurbished computer. That never happened because he was stopped but that was the plan where the obvious issue is that Microsoft didn't do this for copyright reasons where that's what they say in the courts, but the real reason is that Microsoft doesn't like machines being refurbished - but let's forget the obvious in trying to figure out what the guy did wrong. So the guy was selling for 25 cents what Microsoft gives away for free, but where Microsoft convinced the courts that it was free but worth twenty five dollars (where that's what the penalty was based on). It seems the refurbishers could have legally just downloaded what Microsoft gives away for free, but I'm not sure about that - but if that's the case, then the 25 cents is just cheaper for the refurbisher than it would be for them to download and build their own CDs (which may be where Microsoft got the twentyfive dollar number from - as the cost to the refurbisher). Also, the end consumer could have downloaded the CD for free also, and again, maybe the twenty five dollar amount is what the consumer might have paid Microsoft - but maybe not - because it's free to download (or so they said in the articles). One problem I have with all this is a Windows technical problem, which is to ask WHERE do we download, say, Windows XP for free from Microsoft? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
Bob J Jones wrote:
In news He's been generally naughty and must be spanked. "He's guilty of something, I just know it" and off to jail he goes. Paul Somewhere it says he was planning on selling the discs for 25 cents to refurbishers, who presumably would give them to the customer of the refurbished computer. That never happened because he was stopped but that was the plan where the obvious issue is that Microsoft didn't do this for copyright reasons where that's what they say in the courts, but the real reason is that Microsoft doesn't like machines being refurbished - but let's forget the obvious in trying to figure out what the guy did wrong. So the guy was selling for 25 cents what Microsoft gives away for free, but where Microsoft convinced the courts that it was free but worth twenty five dollars (where that's what the penalty was based on). It seems the refurbishers could have legally just downloaded what Microsoft gives away for free, but I'm not sure about that - but if that's the case, then the 25 cents is just cheaper for the refurbisher than it would be for them to download and build their own CDs (which may be where Microsoft got the twentyfive dollar number from - as the cost to the refurbisher). Also, the end consumer could have downloaded the CD for free also, and again, maybe the twenty five dollar amount is what the consumer might have paid Microsoft - but maybe not - because it's free to download (or so they said in the articles). One problem I have with all this is a Windows technical problem, which is to ask WHERE do we download, say, Windows XP for free from Microsoft? He wasn't actually planning on selling the discs for $0.25 each. He paid the Chinese supplier $80,000 for 28,000 discs. Or $2.86 a piece (which is too much, except if the discs needed some sort of surface treatment). He may have decided to "dump" the discs, or some number of discs, to his partner. At that price, he could have had Holograms added, pictures of the Queen, anything he wanted. So much of the case doesn't make sense. A Dell disc, might have a simple Dell logo, and no hologram. Whereas Microsoft Retail Discs have various counterfeit protection features (which I'm sure by now, the Chinese pressing plant has figured out, as they make domestic discs for $5 a piece on the street). The court case claims the "fraud" was that there was a claim the disc was a "retail reinstall" disc. But does the court actually know what it's talking about ? We don't know. What could have happened, is the Dell recovery image (SLIC activated) was repackaged in Microsoft Holographic packaging on a CD for WinXP and a DVD for Windows 7. And that's a possible concept of a kind of fraud. However, the court documentation and the reporting, just don't do a very good job of reporting what the actual materials looked like, or consisted of. So it looks like "xerox [something], go to jail", is about all we can say. There's a certain degree of precision missing in the court document I just saw. https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...-DTKH-1-0.html "falsely told customers... that the Microsoft computer software available for sale was the re-install retail version" The story also says the saga started with him getting a Dell disc from his buddy at the start of the episode. And yet in that passage above, it's claimed they were "falsely claiming their discs were re-install retail". At $2.86 a piece, I could probably burn those on a stack of Ritek blanks with no logos whatsoever, and then there'd be no "perception" of fraud, as software received on a blank like that is "obviously a copy". Why go to the trouble of dressing them up, or using a pressing plant ? There's less labor in a pressing plant. The quality could well be higher. You can buy some nice "dup" setups, with multiple drives, for burning large quantities of "copies" if you need them. Some of the CD forums have a couple people who do stuff like that (full time). There are lots of Chinese (or other country) sellers of various duplicating machines. In fact, some companies that used to be in other businesses, switched to making dup machines as a new business opportunity. The people who make discs as a side project, they don't bother with dup machines. They just use a tower with a bunch of optical drives on it. If they'd done it that way, their production could all have been domestic, and a bit lower profile. Paul |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
Bob J Jones wrote:
In news He's been generally naughty and must be spanked. "He's guilty of something, I just know it" and off to jail he goes. Paul Somewhere it says he was planning on selling the discs for 25 cents to refurbishers, who presumably would give them to the customer of the refurbished computer. That never happened because he was stopped but that was the plan where the obvious issue is that Microsoft didn't do this for copyright reasons where that's what they say in the courts, but the real reason is that Microsoft doesn't like machines being refurbished - but let's forget the obvious in trying to figure out what the guy did wrong. So the guy was selling for 25 cents what Microsoft gives away for free, but where Microsoft convinced the courts that it was free but worth twenty five dollars (where that's what the penalty was based on). It seems the refurbishers could have legally just downloaded what Microsoft gives away for free, but I'm not sure about that - but if that's the case, then the 25 cents is just cheaper for the refurbisher than it would be for them to download and build their own CDs (which may be where Microsoft got the twentyfive dollar number from - as the cost to the refurbisher). Also, the end consumer could have downloaded the CD for free also, and again, maybe the twenty five dollar amount is what the consumer might have paid Microsoft - but maybe not - because it's free to download (or so they said in the articles). One problem I have with all this is a Windows technical problem, which is to ask WHERE do we download, say, Windows XP for free from Microsoft? OK, here is a picture of the disc he made. https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/up...4/delldisc.png https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/25/ho...away-for-free/ So it wasn't an attempt to pass off a Dell image as a Microsoft holographic disc. It's an attempt to pass off a copy of a Dell disc as a Dell disc. Justice wasn't particularly served. The court didn't even test the media properly (compare the image against the original, for signs of adulteration). The guy isn't a saint, but what he did should have been charged properly, and potentially a smaller penalty would be the result. The value of what he copied, is the value of the media (a dollar or less), rather than the value of the license key ($25). As the disc is a convenience item, a "backup" copy of the factory content. If Microsoft wants to make a point about the T&C or the EULA, that's probably a civil court matter. And wasn't argued in this case. Paul |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
In news
He wasn't actually planning on selling the discs for $0.25 each. OK, here is a picture of the disc he made. OK. I defer to you Paul, since everything I said seems to be wrong. I didn't read the court documents as you did. I just read one or two articles. So I'm confused if I read the articles. But you cleared it up. Thank you for the added clarifying detail! BTW, I'm officially confused since nothing adds up, but that's not your fault Paul. It's the case itself is confusing to me. Maybe it's just me. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
Bob J Jones wrote:
In news He wasn't actually planning on selling the discs for $0.25 each. OK, here is a picture of the disc he made. OK. I defer to you Paul, since everything I said seems to be wrong. I didn't read the court documents as you did. I just read one or two articles. So I'm confused if I read the articles. But you cleared it up. Thank you for the added clarifying detail! BTW, I'm officially confused since nothing adds up, but that's not your fault Paul. It's the case itself is confusing to me. Maybe it's just me. It's a mis-carriage of justice. His attorney appears to have argued some of these points in court, to no effect. But some other things stand out. He pleaded guilty to these wrongly-constructed charges. The defense team "agreed" with the prosecutor that the value of the item, was $25 a copy. Perhaps "agreed" means, the defense wasn't able to construct a framework for indicating the true value ? The Dell OS is SLIC activated, so it's not exactly easy to steal, and again, no evidence of any SLIC tampering. (The claims the media was for "Dell Refurbishers"... who wouldn't need to tamper with the SLIC. The SLIC is inside the BIOS chip.) I can't tell from these press reports, whether he got a robust defense, or, that the judge was listening to anything the defense said at all. Maybe yet another article will come out with more detail. Paul |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
What exactly was the E-recycler's plan (the guy going to jail)?
In article , Paul
wrote: His attorney appears to have argued some of these points in court, to no effect. judges don't understand much about technology, plus the laws haven't caught up either. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|