New
#80
No, this was in the New York Times I think, it was because he'd been caught 3 times doing minor things that this sentence came into play. I know there was a big uproar around the world over it, I don't know if they ever lessened the sentence, probably not. Bit like the old woman who got shot for speeding, that was actually caught on camera.
Microsoft distinguises "casual copying" (your "single individual users") and pirates. Pirates distribute activation cracks, sometimes for profit, sometimes on principle, sometimes just for the fun of showing off their programming cleverness. Those are the ones they pursue. The distributors of pirated software have always been the targets for Microsoft Legal.
No offense meant to anyone but if you post a link it's nice to post the information. It seems that the headline is very misleading and the content fills out the details. And that's important.
Content:
This guy had 4 previous "felonies".. yup. And you wonder why he got a stiff sentence.1995-03-03 04:00:00 PDT CALIFORNIA -- TORRANCE - A man who stole a piece of pizza last summer has been sentenced to 25 years to life in prison, sparking renewed debate over the state's tough "three strikes" sentencing law.
Jerry Dewayne Williams, 27, of Los Angeles was convicted of felony petty theft in January for taking a slice of pepperoni pizza from a group of children, ages 7 to 14, eating at Adam's Pizza on the Redondo Beach pier on July 30.
Superior Court Judge Donald Pitts imposed the stiff sentence on Williams, who had four previous felony convictions, after rejecting his attorney's argument that the punishment did not fit the crime.
"Mr. Williams will be facing the same sentence as if he'd raped a woman, molested a child or done a carjacking because the statute does not draw distinctions," said Arnold Lester, Williams' public defender.
Prosecutors had requested the prison term because Williams had prior convictions for robbery, attempted robbery, drug possession and unauthorized use of a vehicle.
As you might recall, the problem with mobo exchanges is that OEMs have rights under their royalty agreements with Microsoft. Microsoft isn't at full liberty to grant transfer rights when those rights belong to the OEM and not MSFT. That's why the upgrade licence inherits the terms of the OEM license. From a policy standpoint, MSFT probably would go with the user, but from a contractual one they have to be more conservative.