In response to tales about the 15-month prison sentence given to Eric Lundgren, Microsoft has written a strident blog put up detailing its standpoint on the case. The put up, titled “The facts a couple of contemporary counterfeiting case brought via the U.S. govt,” consists of a couple of assertions drawn from the case itself, the email evidence that was once submitted for it, and Microsoft ’s own take.
Microsoft ’s company vice chairman of conversation, Frank Shaw, starts via again announcing Microsoft ’s fortify for refurbishing and recycling. however the primary thrust of the put up is to re-assert the findings of the courtroom. After noting that it was once the u.s. executive — no longer Microsoft — that introduced the case, Shaw notes that Lundgren pleaded in charge. He also argues that Lundgren ’s emails contain strong evidence that he did, in reality, intend to benefit from counterfeiting Home Windows.
Included within the put up are a couple of emails detailing how Lundgren wasn ’t just providing software disks, but going to “nice lengths” to make the ones disks appear to be they were made through Microsoft or Dell.
Earlier these days, we published an interview with Lundgren, detailing his side of the story. Despite The Fact That he pleaded responsible, he places blame directly at Microsoft for his jail time. He feels that that is extra approximately protecting income produced from promoting Home Windows to refurbishers than issues about counterfeiting or piracy.
Microsoft clearly disagrees. Shaw concludes this post thusly:
MR. LUNDGREN ’S SCHEME USED TO BE EASY. HE USED TO BE COUNTERFEITING WINDOWS DEVICE IN CHINA AND UPLOADING IT TO THE U.S.. MR. LUNDGREN INTENDED THE DEVICE TO BE OFFERED TO THE REFURBISHER GROUP AS THOUGH IT USED TO BE A SOUND, LICENSED REPRODUCTION OF WINDOWS. IT WAS NOW NOT. THE PROOF IN THE CASE DISPLAYS MR. LUNDGREN USED HIS WISDOM OF THE PC RECYCLING GROUP TO RIP-OFF THE VERY GROUP HE CLAIMED TO CHAMPION AND TO STEER CLEAR OF THE REGULATION. HAD HE SIMPLY DESIRED TO HELP THIS GROUP, WHY DID HE SET UP AN ENTIRE COUNTERFEIT PRODUCTION OPERATION IN CHINA TO MAKE THE CDS SEEM OFFICIAL? AND WHY DID HE CHARGE FOR HIS COUNTERFEIT PRODUCT AND CHECK OUT TO MAKE A PROFIT AT THE PRICE OF THE GROUP HE WAS OSTENSIBLY TRYING TO HELP?
considered one of the core issues of the case was the value of the instrument Lundgren was once attempting to distribute. Lundgren and knowledgeable witness contend that the value used to be necessarily 0. That ’s because, they argue, the true value of the instrument should have been within the license to use the instrument, now not in the repair device itself — which can be downloaded for free from Microsoft ’s own website.
Right Here ’s how Lundgren characterised the issue:
THEY HAVE BEEN EVALUATING IT TO A NEW LICENSE. YOU DON ’T GET A LICENSE WITH THE REPAIR CD. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TREATED THE INFRINGED ITEM AS IF IT WAS A CERTIFIED PRODUCT, THE LICENSE ITSELF, WHAT MICROSOFT SELLS, AND IT ’S NOT. … I WERE GIVEN IN THE WAY OF MICROSOFT ’S MULTI- MULTI- MULTI-MILLION BUCK TRADE MODEL OF RECHARGING OTHER FOLKS FOR COMPUTERS THAT ALREADY HAVE AN WORKING GADGET.
Even If Microsoft ’s response doesn ’t right away address the honor between the repair software and the license to use it, it does appear as if the company is contending that difference is misleading. Shaw writes:
WHILST A REFURBISHER INSTALLS A CONTEMPORARY MODEL OF HOME WINDOWS ON A REFURBISHED PC, WE RATE A DISCOUNTED FEE OF $25 FOR THE INSTRUMENT AND A NEW LICENSE – IT IS NOW NOT FREE. HEAPS OF REFURBISHERS PARTICIPATE IN THIS SOFTWARE LEGALLY WITH OUT CONFUSION, AND THE PROGRAM WORKS.
Whether or not it ’s essential for refurbishers to pay that $25 price to Microsoft for a fresh license continues to be very much still in dispute within the better group, but that ’s the number upon which Lundgren ’s sentence was once based totally. Lundgren is resigned to serving his 15 month sentence. As he informed The Verge: “I Need to jot down a book in prison approximately looking to in finding pleasure.”