MS testers shout ‘Linux’ over Whistler copy protection

Row breaks out over Product Activation


Microsoft's Product Activation technology has triggered a row in the company's official Whistler beta newsgroups, with testers threatening defection to Linux or piracy over the matter. The irate testers - who, as far as we know, haven't actually been hit by a real live Product Activation Whistler build yet - seem to have been sent further up the wall by the intervention of a Microserf, who referred them to a couple of FAQs on the site.

But from the look of the FAQs, this is perfectly understandable. Microsoft - as it pitched to The Register a couple of weeks back - is going to great lengths to stress that Product Activation is easy, takes hardly any time, and doesn't violate your privacy. But from the hardware freak's standpoint, this isn't anywhere near the point. They are concerned about needing to get a new activation key every time they change their hardware, about not being able to run dual boot systems with more than one copy of the OS, and about not being able to have several installations going at the same time.

As far as we can gather right now multi-boot systems probably can run off the same key, but it's being claimed they won't if you use different hard drives, as the hard disk ID is said to be a component of the unique hardware key.

And although having several installations going at the same time might strike you as plainly and obviously illegal, if you think about it this is the kind of scenario a diligent beta tester, a diligent Whistler beta tester, would be likely to get into. It'd be seriously dumb for Microsoft to lock the beta (the technical one, if not the expected widespread one) with Product Activation, even if the company is keen to get the system thoroughly tested.

The FAQs do however flesh out Microsoft's plans for Product Activation, and make it clear how tightly the company wants to control the use of its products. Volume licensed versions (five copies or more, available to businesses or families) won't be locked, but otherwise you get 50 goes for Office before Activation is compulsory, and 30 days use for Whistler.

The 'laptop copy' licence is also pretty clearly defined. It is permitted to install a second copy of application software on your laptop, but not if that software came bundled with a PC. For Windows itself, it's a big fat no: "In the case of the Windows operating system, the Microsoft EULA allows installation on one PC only."

There's what we think is a bit of a soft-shoe shuffle on the Ts & Cs of the EULA (End User Licence Agreement), as the FAQ airily states that it has "been in place for more than ten years." This kind of implies that there's been no change in that period, whereas there's been at least a de facto tightening.

Laptop and/or multiple computer use is quite probably going to be one of the really big irritants of Product Activation. Whatever the EULA actually says (does anyone, apart from poor, dumb journalists and lawyers, read it?) most people think it's perfectly reasonable and morally just for them to be able to install the software on as many computers as they like provided they only use one of them at a time. The desktop-laptop combo is the absolute minimum here, and if/when this is physically blocked by Product Activation, people really will start shouting Linux and pirate copies.

One could of course muse as to how one could obtain two computers and one operating system in a world where Microsoft is trying to stamp out "naked PCs," but it happens with hardware freaks and with upgrades, so it's going to be an issue for some.

We also see a signpost that there will be a new kind of apartheid in the PC OEM market. "Some PC manufacturers," it says, "will activate the Microsoft software in the factory so the end user does not have to do so." And some, consequently, won't.

In previous revs of Microsoft's anti-piracy activities the kind of setup and the kind of media the OEMs have been allowed to ship has varied depending on the deal they got, how important they are, and the level of protection they shipped the software with. It's not obvious what the difference between OEMs who can ship pre-activated software and those who can't will be, but suspicious minds at Redmond may be something to do with it. After all, as PC companies ship a lot of machines that are identical, one ID per batch would work.

Curiously, the final FAQ in one of the Microsoft documents isn't a Q that you'd think was being that F Aed right now: Has Product Activation got anything to do with Microsoft.NET?

Here's the answer, which we think boils down to Yes, and some: "Anti-piracy technologies, such as Microsoft Product Activation, balance both the needs of consumers in acquiring the content they want, and the rights of content owners to protect the distribution of their works. In a .NET environment, where digital content and services are accessed on a variety of devices that communicate with each other, the protection of digital content must accompany the facilitation of Internet services. Such a seamless interaction is at the heart of the Microsoft .NET intellectual property protection vision."

Note that what Microsoft is talking about here is not protection of its own application and operating software IP, as is the case with Product Activation, but of digital content in general. We foresee the return of the tollgate vision, and await Microsoft's next stabs at its construction with interest. ®

Related stories:
MS opens up on Whistler copy protection

Microsoft FAQs:
FAQs
Fact sheet


Other stories you might like

  • FTC urged to protect data privacy of women visiting abortion clinics
    As Supreme Court set to overturn Roe v Wade, safeguards on location info now more vital than ever

    Democrat senators have urged America's Federal Trade Commission to do something to protect the privacy of women after it emerged details of visits to abortion clinics were being sold by data brokers.

    Women's healthcare is an especially thorny issue right now after the Supreme Court voted in a leaked draft majority opinion to overturn Roe v Wade, a landmark ruling that declared women's rights to have an abortion are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution.

    If the nation's top judges indeed vote to strike down that 1973 decision, individual states, at least, can set their own laws governing women's reproductive rights. Thirteen states already have so-called "trigger laws" in place prohibiting abortions – mostly with exceptions in certain conditions, such as if the pregnancy or childbirth endangers the mother's life – that will go into effect if Roe v Wade is torn up. People living in those states would, in theory, have to travel to another state where abortion is legal to carry out the procedure lawfully, although laws are also planned to ban that.

    Continue reading
  • Zuckerberg sued for alleged role in Cambridge Analytica data-slurp scandal
    I can prove CEO was 'personally involved in Facebook’s failure to protect privacy', DC AG insists

    Cambridge Analytica is back to haunt Mark Zuckerberg: Washington DC's Attorney General filed a lawsuit today directly accusing the Meta CEO of personal involvement in the abuses that led to the data-slurping scandal. 

    DC AG Karl Racine filed [PDF] the civil suit on Monday morning, saying his office's investigations found ample evidence Zuck could be held responsible for that 2018 cluster-fsck. For those who've put it out of mind, UK-based Cambridge Analytica harvested tens of millions of people's info via a third-party Facebook app, revealing a – at best – somewhat slipshod handling of netizens' privacy by the US tech giant.

    That year, Racine sued Facebook, claiming the social network was well aware of the analytics firm's antics yet failed to do anything meaningful until the data harvesting was covered by mainstream media. Facebook repeatedly stymied document production attempts, Racine claimed, and the paperwork it eventually handed over painted a trail he said led directly to Zuck. 

    Continue reading
  • Florida's content-moderation law kept on ice, likely unconstitutional, court says
    So cool you're into free speech because that includes taking down misinformation

    While the US Supreme Court considers an emergency petition to reinstate a preliminary injunction against Texas' social media law HB 20, the US Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday partially upheld a similar injunction against Florida's social media law, SB 7072.

    Both Florida and Texas last year passed laws that impose content moderation restrictions, editorial disclosure obligations, and user-data access requirements on large online social networks. The Republican governors of both states justified the laws by claiming that social media sites have been trying to censor conservative voices, an allegation that has not been supported by evidence.

    Multiple studies addressing this issue say right-wing folk aren't being censored. They have found that social media sites try to take down or block misinformation, which researchers say is more common from right-leaning sources.

    Continue reading
  • US-APAC trade deal leaves out Taiwan, military defense not ruled out
    All fun and games until the chip factories are in the crosshairs

    US President Joe Biden has heralded an Indo-Pacific trade deal signed by several nations that do not include Taiwan. At the same time, Biden warned China that America would help defend Taiwan from attack; it is home to a critical slice of the global chip industry, after all. 

    The agreement, known as the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), is still in its infancy, with today's announcement enabling the United States and the other 12 participating countries to begin negotiating "rules of the road that ensure [US businesses] can compete in the Indo-Pacific," the White House said. 

    Along with America, other IPEF signatories are Australia, Brunei, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. Combined, the White House said, the 13 countries participating in the IPEF make up 40 percent of the global economy. 

    Continue reading
  • 381,000-plus Kubernetes API servers 'exposed to internet'
    Firewall isn't a made-up word from the Hackers movie, people

    A large number of servers running the Kubernetes API have been left exposed to the internet, which is not great: they're potentially vulnerable to abuse.

    Nonprofit security organization The Shadowserver Foundation recently scanned 454,729 systems hosting the popular open-source platform for managing and orchestrating containers, finding that more than 381,645 – or about 84 percent – are accessible via the internet to varying degrees thus providing a cracked door into a corporate network.

    "While this does not mean that these instances are fully open or vulnerable to an attack, it is likely that this level of access was not intended and these instances are an unnecessarily exposed attack surface," Shadowserver's team stressed in a write-up. "They also allow for information leakage on version and build."

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022