Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

sideus · Dec 17, 2004, 10:57 PM

This is messed up. Someone posted a comment that included a serial for Windows 2003, so MS demands that forest.net shutdown macslash.org.

Read More...
As a Happy Holidays present yesterday Microsoft lawyers contacted digital.forest, our hosting provider, with a cute little email demanding an "immediate take-down" of MacSlash for infringing activity. Being the good guys that they are, digital.forest promptly got in touch with Microsoft (email reprinted with permission below the fold) with a response: No way.

It seems that several (and by several, we mean 8) months ago an anonymous commenter posted a comment which contained a purported serial number for Longhorn. The comment was rated -1 and until yesterday those of us who administer MacSlash were completely unaware of it lurking there in our archives.

Ridiculous.

Superchicken · Dec 17, 2004, 11:01 PM

This should up their readership.

Wiskedjak · Dec 17, 2004, 11:04 PM

Originally posted by sideus:
Ridiculous.

Do you honestly think Apple would do any differently? What do you think Apple would do if I posted a like to a beta of Tiger on MacNN and the mods neglected to remove the link for 8 months? Ask the mods why they would immediately remove any such link and you'll find out that the answer is "Apple would do exactly the same as M$"

Cipher13 · Dec 17, 2004, 11:10 PM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Do you honestly think Apple would do any differently? What do you think Apple would do if I posted a like to a beta of Tiger on MacNN and the mods neglected to remove the link for 8 months? Ask the mods why they would immediately remove any such link and you'll find out that the answer is "Apple would do exactly the same as M$"

Posting a serial, and "posting Tiger" are very different things.

The former would require you had already illegally acquired Longhorn (had you legally acquired it, you'd not need the serial key), and as such, can't be treated the same as posting a link to the actual piece of software itself.

Let's compare apples to apples, shall we?

Disgruntled Head of C-3PO · Dec 17, 2004, 11:14 PM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Do you honestly think Apple would do any differently? What do you think Apple would do if I posted a like to a beta of Tiger on MacNN and the mods neglected to remove the link for 8 months? Ask the mods why they would immediately remove any such link and you'll find out that the answer is "Apple would do exactly the same as M$"

Apple has done worse actually.

Wiskedjak · Dec 17, 2004, 11:19 PM

Originally posted by Cipher13:
Posting a serial, and "posting Tiger" are very different things.

The former would require you had already illegally acquired Longhorn (had you legally acquired it, you'd not need the serial key), and as such, can't be treated the same as posting a link to the actual piece of software itself.

Let's compare apples to apples, shall we?

And, what do you think Apple would do if I posted a serial for FinalCut on the MacNN boards and the mods neglected to remove that serial for 8 months?

Cipher13 · Dec 17, 2004, 11:25 PM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
And, what do you think Apple would do if I posted a serial for FinalCut on the MacNN boards and the mods neglected to remove that serial for 8 months?

Speculation is not my my fort�.

However, since you seem so inclined to partake therein, this is what I speculate Apple would do: request that MacNN remove the offending material.

There. Speculated. No more valid than your speculation that Apple would request that MacNN's colocator take down the entire domain, or whatever.

The point of that was what, exactly?

Wiskedjak · Dec 17, 2004, 11:30 PM

Originally posted by Cipher13:
The point of that was what, exactly?

To point out that M$ is not so much more evil than Apple as some would like to believe. Many Mac users seek to demonize M$ for protecting it's product while praising Apple for doing the same.

sideus · Dec 17, 2004, 11:38 PM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
To point out that M$ is not so much more evil than Apple as some would like to believe. Many Mac users seek to demonize M$ for protecting it's product while praising Apple for doing the same.

All MS had to do is contact the admin of the site and ask the offending post be removed. Instead, they run to the hosting company and demand the whole site be taken down. Somewhat extreme I'd say.

Cipher13 · Dec 17, 2004, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
To point out that M$ is not so much more evil than Apple as some would like to believe. Many Mac users seek to demonize M$ for protecting it's product while praising Apple for doing the same.

And how, exactly, did you succeed in your aim, seeing as my speculation, which you were evidently basing your point off, involved a much more reasonable reaction from Apple?

Komisar · Dec 18, 2004, 12:03 AM

Originally posted by Cipher13:
And how, exactly, did you succeed in your aim, seeing as my speculation, which you were evidently basing your point off, involved a much more reasonable reaction from Apple?

DeathToWindows · Dec 18, 2004, 02:23 PM

chalk another one up for sheer human stupidity... longhorn is so far off of being done that a SN would be as useful as a piece of damp toilet paper

olePigeon · Dec 18, 2004, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Do you honestly think Apple would do any differently? What do you think Apple would do if I posted a like to a beta of Tiger on MacNN and the mods neglected to remove the link for 8 months? Ask the mods why they would immediately remove any such link and you'll find out that the answer is "Apple would do exactly the same as M$"

That's absolutely ridiculous...

Apple doesn't have a SN for their Operating System.

Wiskedjak · Dec 18, 2004, 05:31 PM

Originally posted by olePigeon:
Apple doesn't have a SN for their Operating System.

That's why my scenario had a link to Tiger rather than a serial. My revised scenario had a serial for Final Cut.

Link · Dec 18, 2004, 05:47 PM

In the revised scenario, apple would have sent a C&D to the offending website. Simple as that.

C&D != WE DEMAND YOU TAKE DOWN YOUR SITE!

gatekeeper · Dec 18, 2004, 06:10 PM

Nevermind that Microsoft didn't request that they shutdown the entire site.

We hereby give notice of these activities to you and request that you take expeditious action to remove or disable access to the material described above, and thereby prevent the unauthorized distribution of these cracks and product keys via your company's network.

What is "the material described above"?

2. Copyright infringing material or activity found at the following
location(s): http://macslash.org/comments.pl?sid=3315&cid=33568

It's dishonest to claim that Microsoft is requesting that they shutdown the entire site.

When Apple sent a takedown notice to SourceForge over playfair, that didn't get portrayed as "Apple requests that SourceForge be shutdown".

As far as I can tell, the only thing Microsoft deserves criticism for in this case is that they sent the takedown notice to the hosting provider instead of the person the domain is registered to.

Cipher13 · Dec 18, 2004, 09:12 PM

Originally posted by gatekeeper:
Nevermind that Microsoft didn't request that they shutdown the entire site.

What is "the material described above"?

It's dishonest to claim that Microsoft is requesting that they shutdown the entire site.

When Apple sent a takedown notice to SourceForge over playfair, that didn't get portrayed as "Apple requests that SourceForge be shutdown".

As far as I can tell, the only thing Microsoft deserves criticism for in this case is that they sent the takedown notice to the hosting provider instead of the person the domain is registered to.

Given that Macslash is colocated (as should be the assumption - this means the hosts do not have access to the Macslash machines), and Microsoft demanded an immediate takedown of offending materials - that means Microsoft basically demanded them to take Macslash down.

Otherwise, why wouldn't they have simply emailed Macslash?

Oh, and Wiskedjak - no response yet?

Wiskedjak · Dec 18, 2004, 09:33 PM

Originally posted by Cipher13:
Oh, and Wiskedjak - no response yet?

Your speculation is no more or less valid than mine ... though I think yours looks at Apple through rose coloured glasses.

olePigeon · Dec 18, 2004, 10:47 PM

Microsoft is where it is not because they bring innovation and fair business practices to the market. I would imagine people think it's a little more understandable when Apple asks a site to stop posting serial numbers to its software because they're effected by piracy to a much larger degree than Microsoft.

Besides, Microsoft doesn't make money on Windows from retail sales, it makes its money on licensing from computer manufacturers and delusional institutions that think Windows is cheaper.

Wiskedjak · Dec 18, 2004, 11:50 PM

Originally posted by olePigeon:
Microsoft is where it is not because they bring innovation and fair business practices to the market.

What does posting serials have to do with fair business practice? What does protecting your product from piracy have to do with innovation? Is Apple more innovative than Microsoft? Sure. Would Apple let a site get away with posting a serial for one of it's products for 8 months? Absolutely not.

I see nothing wrong with a company taking every available course of action in the protection of it's products against piracy.

TheJoshu · Dec 19, 2004, 12:05 AM

Based on reading the complaint, it looks like digital.forest, MacSlash, and - uh - most of you - all misread it. The e-mail requested that that material - implying that specific page that was linked to - be taken off-line. I don't see any place where it says the entire site.

So basically, what the e-mail was asking is exactly what digital.forest and MacSlash are chastising it for not asking. Has anybody else actually read the original e-mail?