Hi guys! So…yeah, I have a W10 IoT LTSC permanently activated via massgrave getting this warning. Any idea what’s up? Shouldn’t it continue chugging along for a good few years more?
EDIT: This is a VM, as I run mainly Linux on everything if I can avoid it. I’m just feating there might be more like this.
Id disagree. Its not my responsibility to close all their doors that are accessible to the public. Microsoft provided all the tools to use their software without their involvement. As a US citizen, I’m liable for my own negligence and/or ignorance. Corporations are pegally protected under corporate personhood so the same liabilities affect them too.
Legally, it isn’t. The DMCA (and compatible laws in non-US countries, which those countries have to have or they’re not allowed a trade deal, and not having a trade deal with the US is devastating for an economy) doesn’t require copyright holders to do anything to defend their copyright. It does make it illegal to do (nearly) anything with copyrighted media that you don’t have explicit permission to do from the copyright holder (there are some exceptions, but people generally think they go further than they really do). It also makes it illegal to do (nearly) anything to circumvent DRM, even if you have a legal right to use the thing that the DRM is protecting, no matter how crappy the DRM is and how easily it can be bypassed.
You’re allowed to think that the law is stupid (it’s the DMCA - everyone who looks at it and isn’t a multibillion dollar publishing company thinks it’s stupid), but that doesn’t mean that it’s not the law, and for legal terms like piracy, you can’t just substitute your own definition based on what should be legal if it conflicts with the definition that says what really is legal.
The reason why non-crap DRM exists when there’s no legal reason to make it not crap is the same reason why DRM exists at all when there’s no legal reason to have DRM at all when piracy of DRM-free stuff is already a crime. It’s that publishers think that the more of a hassle it is to pirate things, the more likely people are to buy things legally. Technically, a shareholder could sue a company for using crap DRM that failed to protect their IP, but the company has a decent defence by saying that they felt that intrusive DRM would hurt their reputation with legitimate customers, so not using strong DRM is not grounds to say a company’s been negligent and liable for any losses they make due to piracy.
I thought activation scripts were somewhat of a grey area legally?
No, they’re illegal several times over as you’ve got to pirate the thing in the first place to end up in a situation where you need one, and then they’re inherently a DRM circumvention device, which are illegal to possess, and then using them circumvents DRM, which is illegal to do. The upside is that you’re unlikely to be caught.
We’re talking about Windows ltsc aren’t we? https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter/download-windows-11-iot-enterprise-ltsc-eval the ISO is freely available on Microsofts website.
It’s freely available for evaluation purposes (from that link - it’s freely available for other purposes from other links, too, and so are other editions of Windows), but that doesn’t mean you’re legally allowed to use those public links however you want. If the copyright holder says they’re for evaluation purposes only, then if you know you aren’t intending to pay even if you like it, then you’re not evaluating whether or not the download link is public, so it still counts as piracy. It’s still stealing to take produce from a roadside stall with an honesty box if you don’t pay even though the produce was just sitting out in the open.
Okay, so it’s not illegal to obtain the ISO as you said before, and you’re not breaking DRM, your breaking TOS. Yes, this is generally regarded as piracy and illegal, but downloading the ISO is not. Your analogy only works if the fruit stand has infinite fruit being cloned over and over again from the same original fruit automatically and costs the fruit stand practically nothing when you don’t pay.
Copyright law is written as if magically duplicating the fruit is the same thing as stealing it. In a discussion about what the law is rather than what it should be in a sensible society, the analogy is fine. As Microsoft is the copyright holder, you only have the right to do anything with their files that they have deigned to grant you, and anything else is legally piracy. In the case of this specific link, they’ve granted the public the right to use it for evaluation purposes, but they’ve not granted any other rights, so it is legal to use the link to download the file for evaluation purposes, and illegal to use it for anything else.
If you want a slightly different analogy, it’s a little like how if Disney put on a free screening of the latest Marvel film for disabled children at a cinema, and didn’t check at the door, an able bodied adult could wander in, past signs saying that the screening was for disabled children only, and watch the film for free, but the fact that they could physically gain access doesn’t mean they had any legal right to be there. They could be ejected from the cinema and/or sued for the cost of a ticket and any legal costs. You do not have a legal right to click link on Microsoft’s website next to some text saying that it’s for evaluation purposes only unless you’re clicking it for evaluation purposes only. Just because you’ve made it to the link, it doesn’t mean you can ignore the text saying who is and isn’t allowed to click it.
Okay, still a bad analogy as the fruit stand clearly states you free to take this fruit without payment and evaluate it, but if you want to eat more than a bite you have to pay us or throw it away.
Clearly you have a pedantic streak, but you’d be very hard pressed legally to find anyone saying you’ve broke the law by downloading an iso that is freely available online nor would any DMCA requests or the like be filled. Furthermore, casual downloaders who do not distribute or attempt to profit off of pirating windows are rarely if ever prosecuted.
Also, like what are you doing? Are you just trying to be right or is there some underlining principal I’m missing? Is it just piracy=illegal=bad?
The script is legal. Not paying for software that requires you to pay is illegal.
It’s like DeCSS code that strips drm from DVDs was legally grey but downloading movies you didn’t pay for is illegal.
It’s not your responsibility to close the doors, but it is your responsibility not to walk in an open door and take something that’s not yours
Yep, and that negligence/ignorance you’re liable for in this case is piracy.
You’re welcome to disagree with a bad law (and make no mistake, I absolutely think it’s a bad law), but you’re still liable for breaking laws you don’t agree with. By all means break it, but don’t pretend you’re not breaking it, and make sure you take reasonable precautions to keep yourself safe while doing so.
You’re picking up what im putting down lol. Didn’t mean to say I was disagreeing with what youre saying just in this case especially:
Where I’ve paid for each new pc build to just have a blank slate and not carry over my digital footprint for microsoft from one build to the next. Also, tho, im not taking what isnt already mine, im just using a work around for dealing with microsoft’s atrocious customer service.
Again, not saying this will hold up in a court of law, jist saying I dont lose any sleep over it.
Bonus rationalization: fuckin outlooks locked in and un-adjustable junk mail filters have auto filtered Microsoft own emails for upcoming annual Office invoices to my junk folder that I used to rarely check before getting slammed with over a $100 charge for Office eliminating my ability to use the email reminders as notification to cancel my subscription cuz even if you paid for a year of Office but wanna cancel a month into the year so you dont forget, microsoft says naaaaaaa you lose the remaining 11 months of paid software access.