[Tfug] Shameless Software Trafficking (Wildly OT)

[Bexley Hall]

--- On Fri, 7/24/09, Jim March <1.jim.march at gmail.com> wrote:

[much elided]
 
> Example: my lappy I'm typing this on came with Vista - but a copy of
> Vista code-locked to the Dell motherboard it shipped with.  Which
> means I couldn't virtualize it and run it under Linux...it would no
> longer see the Dell metal underneath and therefore refuse
> to run.

Then the problem is with *your* choice of virtualization
environment.  Fix that so that it *truly* presents the same
hardware view to the OS and the OS won't know any better.

> So can somebody explain to me why it's illegal for Win3.0 to ensure
> that it's running on MS/PC-DOS underneath, yet it's legal for Vista to
> block any attempt to run it underneath Linux to give it some measure
> of serious malware protection?  I can't see how one could be found
> illegal (leading to a $200mil payday for DR-DOS's owners) yet my
> damned similar case be legal on Microsoft's part.

You're assuming (alleging) MS put the "fingerprinting" in the
software just to keep it off of Linux (et al.) virtualized
environments.  I'm sure MS didn't give a rats ass for those
folks who wanted to run Vista *and* Linux on the same box
(note you could always dual boot to get around the obfuscation
caused by the IMPERFECT virtualization of your hardware).
Rather, MS wanted to tie a license to a particular piece of
hardware.  If you've obscured the view of that hardware, then
MS might want to come after *you* for violating the terms of
your license!

> Microsoft's motive for this violation of existing precedent is
> obvious: hurt Linux.  They do NOT like the idea of machines running
> around that boot Linux, use the 'net on Linux to avoid malware and
> then run Windows as a VM for software compatibility.  That's their
> worst nightmare.

(sigh)  Sounds like the Grassy Knoll all over again.

MS wants to protect their IP.  You can run their product
(with their blessing!) on that machine that you have in 
front of you.  But, you have to do so the way *they* (and YOU!)
agreed when you accepted their license terms.  If you don't like
the terms, don't buy the product!

E.g., I don't carry credit cards with high annual fees, rates,
etc.  "Just say no".  OTOH, folks would laugh at me if I used
a card with a 30% APR and then complained that they were
CHARGING ME that 30%!

Of course, folks rationalize stealing IP with any number of
excuses.  But, don't expect folks to sympathize with your
particular set of excuses (especially those of us who put
food in our mouths and roof over our heads with IP!).

E.g., do you volunteer 100% of your time policing elections?
Why do you expect folks to *pay* you for doing that service?
Don't you want to do it "because it is right"?  To promote
a better Democracy?