Activation is anonymous and compulsory.
Registration is not anonymous and is "optional", but in the same sense
as using passwords in XP is "optional". Choosing not to use the
option means anyone else can hijack it by doing so; if it were *truly*
optional, you could place on record "the owner chooses NOT to use this
option" so that no further attempts to use the option would succeed.
If a product is activated *and* registered, the possibility exists
that these two data can be linked, ergo
"changer of the motherboard" = "person who registered"
If your hardware changes "too much" so that WPA launches a DoS attack
against the user (refuses to run except Safe Mode, limited number of
Safe Mode sessions allowed, then death) then you have to phone MS and
beg. Part of your attempts to motivate why you should be spared the
sword are likely to involve surrendering your anonymity (you'd prolly
volunteer this even if no demand was made for it).
I live in a place where crime is no laughing matter; 30% schoolgirls
get raped, murder second only to AIDS as leading cause of death in
certain age groups, that sort of thing. Computers get stolen, and
sometimes whoever gets in the way gets murdered.
With this in mind, I find MS's policy on WPA in the case of stolen
computers to be unacceptable. WPA offers the possibility of rendering
stolen PCs less valuable, much as cancelled stolen credit cards are,
but MS does not pursue this; it's purely for their benefit.
I found this out when I called to report three XP PCs stolen after a
break-in that had almost demolished a wall in the process. I wanted
those product keys blocked, and to get replacement keys so when the
victim's PCs were rebuilt, they could re-use their licenses.
The party line was:
- the license is the sticker that was affixed to the PC case
- "we are not in the business of making new stickers"
- "don't worry, insurance will pay for your new copies of XP"
My response was: "Is that official MS policy? If so, it's certainly
newsworthy. What is your name, and can I quote you on that?" At that
point it was declared no, it wasn't official MS policy and I should
not quote the person's name in connection with this, but it remained
unclear as to what the official policy was.
From that day forth, I decided to ignore MS's advice to stick licenses
on cases, and now provide these to the user for safekeeping (as in, in
a safe, bank vault, or other escrow facility). It is NOT acceptable
to me that the theif should be honored as the "licensed user", which
effectively sees MS as profiting from crime.
Up until then, I'd been sticking the license on the underside of the
case, so that a passing person with a pen and paper could not as
easily ballpoint the key, call MS with a story to activate, and go
"yes, I'd love to register!" and thereby "stealing" that key from the
anonymous user in terms of future WPA-triggered squabbles.
Well, MS has always bent the knee for large OEMs in ways that are
beneficial to both MS and OEM, with only the user getting shafted:
- crippleware licensing
- no OS CD, only a HD image that evaporates
- proprietary CD that can't be used on other hardware
- incomplete CDs that leave out Backup, RC, etc.
- "instant restore" CDs that preclude custom or repair installs
- proprietary drivers integrated into CD, no stand-alone form
- BIOS-locking WPA model to "encourage brand loyalty"
- these user-hostile products may be demanded by OEMs...
- ...but they are *discounted* by MS to encourage uptake
OEM gains brand lock-in, and MS gains extra sales where the stunted
(but legal) licenses force a "one PC, two licenses" bonanza.
MS turned a blind eye to software piracy long ago, because it helped
them build there dominence of the desktop. One they monopolized the
desktop, then they started to get more serious about the piracy that
help them buil their monopoly.
Think about this in terms of MS responsability to shareholders.
Shareholders fall into three types:
- company members, for whom stock is a large part of their wealth
- large investors who take an interest in procedings
- small investors who don't have a clue about what's going on
When a company fails to deliver shareholder value, the large investors
usually figure this out, whip up public outrage from the small
investor base, and cause management heads to roll. Where management
are major shareholders (what would happen to BG's fortune if MSFT
traded at 0.01 per share?), they are already well-motivated to ensure
shareholder value is not frittered away.
MSFT has been a great share, because its revenues were pretty much
exploding from year to year. How can that trend be maintained when
everyone has already bought MSware?
- create new products to sell (difficult; the essentials are "done")
- expand into new markets (requires hi-level political influence)
- convert the non-paying userbase into paid licensees (WPA etc.)
- extort more money for the same old stuff (rental, volume changes)
- retire products faster, to stimulate faster replacement sales
If growth cannot be maintained, then it becomes necessary to build
share value in another way - by aiming for blue-chip reliability. Of
the four strategies, revenue protection via forced licensing of
essential use is arguably the best way to do this.
To MS's credit, they are currently not pursuing the last strategy; a
committment to 7-year product support will have the reverse effect.
But that does fit with the "blue-chip" approach, which IMO sooner or
later MS is going to have to embrace.[/QUOTE]
Especially if they ever want to get out from under the glare of the
Anti-Trust spotlight.
MS could position itself as the sole provider of the magic keys that
allow media pimps to preserve their (diminishing) value.
For every obviously wealthy Michael Jackson, there is a faceless media
pimp who has creamed off even more, and who has the good sense to stay
off radar. Imagine if all of these *true* financial masters of the
entertainment industry had to license their DRM technologies from
MS... that sort of monopoly makes desktop ownership child's play.
What other value do media pimps have? The Internet distributes more
effectively, is cheaper, and provides far less barrier to entry than
media companies do. If I'm a musician, I can get my music to global
ears easily via the 'net, without having to beg a company to help. If
I am a consumer in search of a rare item, the 'net can deliver this to
me faster, and with less excuses, than the industry.
The only thing the pimps are better at - and it's a biggie - is
providing income to the content creatror, even when it does so as a
marine-cables-attached trickledown.
To grow into new markets such as China, MS needs big government more
than it needs industry alliances. Expect to see MS doing big
government's dirty work... DRM falls into this category, as it
basically leverages industries USA is big in (entertainment, software)
over industries other countries are big in (food, manufactured goods).
As private companies, Intel and MS can do things that would not
survive public scrutiny if done by government. Consider:
- the Clinton administration floats the idea of Clipper
- public pressure shoots it down
- meanwhile, MS is on the DoJ's rack; damaging info made public etc.
- Intel is next in line for the same treatment
- Intel announces the Clipper-like Pentium III serial number
- Intel refuses to back down in the face of public pressure
- Intel's case dropped by DoJ with no evidence being led
- Intel's P4 lacks the SN feature; not so "essential" after all, eh?
Join the dots...
The rights you save may be your own
Great post! You certainly have a very good understanding about what
motivates corporate actions.
"Which would you rather have, power or money?"
MS's answer: Why choose when you can have both.
I'm afraid the the era of anonymous purchase & use of consumer goods is
over, and I'm partly to blame. I absolutely love shopping over the
internet. Why trudge around a store, when you can shop at home in your
boxers! Electronic commerce demands that all transactions are not
anonymous, and cash purchases are becoming a thing of the past. What we
need is a consumer-friendly technology to verify payment but protect our
right to anonymous cash-like purchases, instead of technologies like PA, DRM
and RFID. Pipe Dream? Probably.
--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
