Victim of software counterfeiting

Hello Richard
I am in TOTAL agreement with you and ALL those in favour of WGA.
I have no time for thieves or handlers(those who receive stolen property -
knowingly of course). They deserve what they get.
Any company, business or person has the right to protect their property,
even that in transit.
'I got it from a friend' & 'I met this man in a pub/bar' & 'he said it fell
off the back of a lorry and winked at me' Heard them all and many others.
I would not give a damn if MS came up with a WGA that completely cut
off/stopped their computers from even starting or made them impossible to
use.
Now this might seem strange coming from one accused of being an MS Sceptic
and Anti-MS. But those accusers I doubt to see to the end of their noses.

I am sceptic about most things and question everything, not just MS. I have
been around too long to just accept things at first glance.
My objections are to the way WGA was offered/arrived and that once one had
it installed and found that one's OS was
legit/authenticated/authorised/certified etc etc, this bloody 'imposition'
then has to stay on your machine. Yes I am sceptic - as to what the bloody
thing is doing, having done what it was intended to do, but still on my
computer and non removable.
A very senior judge in the UK, some 20yrs ago, had two defendants in court
for sentencing. One was a thief and a burglar who had committed some 40+
crimes.
The other ran one of those second-hand goods shops and he had bought most of
what the thief had stolen(at a tenth of their true value). He gave the
thief three years imprisonment and the receiver five years.
After the two had been 'taken down' the barrister for the receiver asked the
judge why he had given his client a longer prison sentence.
The judge replied, " If there were not any receivers of stolen property
there would not be any thieves"
The judge immediately left the Court, leaving the barrister standing there
with his mouth wide open.
I know - I was there.

Side Comment
Re Clay's mention of Sony - was it not alleged they put on these rootkits
without people's knowledge and there was a serious security problem with
them as well. But then I believe Norton and another company were found to
have done a similar thing with their products. I MAY BE WRONG THOUGH.
I think Sony had to remove theirs???? or plug the security issue.
No litigation please.

I think I have made plain where I stand on this WGA issue.
This is my opinion. I am not open to persuasion to alter it.
Rgds
Antioch



"Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23PFNdqfgGHA.1260@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I have to wonder just how many people are finding out, much to their
>dismay, that the operating system on their computer is not legal. They can
>turn in the jerk who put it on his/her system and charged him/her for it -
>as if it were a legal copy.
>
> As far as easily removing WGA, now that would negate the whole point of
> Microsoft doing what they are doing, wouldn't it?
>
> An extremely rich man has the option of putting lo-jack in his Ferrari. He
> doesn't have to allow anyone to steal it, just because he can easily
> afford to purchase a replacement, or two.
>
> Regardless of what anyone says, my feeling is that Microsoft has the right
> to use WGA to ferret out the illegal copies. The user, when caught, has
> options.
>
> 1. He can say to himself: I got away with it for five years. I guess I
> will have to finally buy a copy of Windows XP.
>
> 2. He can - yes, really he can - start using an alternative if he is
> too cheap to purchase a replacement for that which he has stolen.
>
> 3. He can try to find a way around WGA. But I would expect Microsoft to
> counter at any time. If I were them, I would.
>
> I have in my software closet multiple copies of every operating system
> Microsoft released since DOS 6.0., as well as three different versions of
> OS/2. I paid for each one of them. Added up, it would be in the
> thousands. Do I hold it against Microsoft and IBM that I had to pay for
> what I wanted? I'll let you guess on that, but I will gladly pay for
> Windows Vista when it is released, because I "WANT" it.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Richard Urban
> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
>
> Quote from George Ankner:
> If you knew as much as you think you know,
> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
>
> "Jeff" <jeffwhat44.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23pVIZvegGHA.1320@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Richard,
>> Point taken; however Genuine Advantage Validation Tool does the same
>> thing; help stop piracy;without being "spyware" ALMOST. Not being able to
>> easily remove software; No ADD/REMOVE option is borderline-at best.
>> Pretty much unremovable;to a majority of users; who either do not know
>> how;or if they do; care not to mess with the registry. So again, MS
>> resorts to spyware tactics over this issue. Any more justifiable because
>> it's from MS? I think not. Resorting to the same actions as disreputable
>> "pirates" solves nothing. In fact;to the contrary;will end up doing more
>> harm to MS then good.
>>
>> "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Or6V$iegGHA.1856@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>>> A bit nasty minded from Bill Gates however. As if he hasn't
>>>> got enough money already.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Just because the owner of the local hamburger joint is rich doesn't mean
>>> he has to "give" away his food - does it?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Richard Urban
>>> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
>>>
>>> Quote from George Ankner:
>>> If you knew as much as you think you know,
>>> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>