Hacker News Reader

Comment by asdefghyk | Hacker News Reader

Is not generally well known but Microsoft stole the idea of product activation ( as used in Windows XP and more ) and copied the methodology of the activation parameters etc from the guy that invented and patented it . There was a big court case about it and appeals , it ended with Microsoft having to pay penalty of (I recall ) $250M USD . There is very brief info on this wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ric_Richardson

There is a much more detailed video by Ric RIchardson around I will see if I can find it and post the link .....

OK found the link. https://rss.com/podcasts/unemployable/1485621/

This link has blurb for another entrepreneur company, just ignore / skip that. There is a part where the inventor gives detailed info about the court battle with Microsoft and technical details of his product activation technology.

View on HN

One other thing , if you want to know all the dodgy court cases Microsoft got involved in and the penalty's that had to pay- it will be mentioned / disclosed in their annual financial reports - since these large amounts , even possible amounts needed to be advised to shareholders in case /if/when they lost .....

I should add a party to the court case , disclosed the amount Cira $250M USD

even though in wikipedia says its not disclosed ....

They might have stolen the "patented method" (and i know how much u guys love patents), but they certainly did not steal the "idea". Software has had all sorts of horrible copy-protection for decades before this was introduced.

In the quoted source from the inventor -the inventor mentions his disbelief that Microsoft used the exact same parameters (that the inventor used ) as determined from the PC - I think things like MAC address etc to uniquely id the machine

That's part of what I meant "... steal the idea ..."

Of course, the comment that there are lots copy protection methods ( previously ) is correct

THe inventor also had to spend cira about $15M in legal fees to bring his case. ANd that is many years ago 15-20? so a much bigger $ today. A small company would have no chance to be able to afford such a financial outlay ... Microsoft was often accused of obtaining information under NDA then developing their own similar product etc One case I recall was PEN computing. Pen Computing lost their case with the result "not proven" There where many more such cases, similar from smaller companies. Of course how many that where valid is unknown , since the court case often not go ahead, since small company not have resources ....

Not listening to a blahcast, but shit like MAC addresses and other hardware IDs were well known to everyone in the field. Companies had 'inventory systems' which used this long before MS cared. I certainly don't begrudge anyone from getting their patented pound of flesh from Gates, just pointing out this is a great litmus test between the GNU and the not.

I think the above comment was about product activation specifically, and not the general concept of copy protection.

Of course, whether the method used for XP-era product activation should ever have been patentable in the first place is another questoin.

The patent https://patents.google.com/patent/US5490216A/en

The MAC address was only one parameter (of many) that allowed the creation of a unique hardware id (apparently)

A wikipedia page specifically about the dispute with Microsoft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniloc_USA,_Inc._v._Microsoft_....

A AI summary reposted (sorry if this not allowed ?) below

Australian inventor Ric Richardson pioneered software activation in the early 1990s, developing a "try-before-you-buy" system (Demoware) using a unique machine fingerprint and key-code unlocking system, now used on billions of computers. His 1992 patent (US5490216) resulted in a major legal victory against Microsoft, ending in a confidential settlement valued at over $530 million.

Key details of the Ric Richardson patent and dispute: The Invention: Richardson created a method for software anti-piracy where, upon purchase, a user receives a code to unlock full functionality, addressing the need to try software before buying. Uniloc Company: Richardson founded Uniloc to develop and market this copy-protection software.

The Microsoft Dispute: In 1993, Richardson demonstrated his technology to Microsoft, which subsequently developed a similar activation system for products like Office, Windows XP, and Windows Server.

Legal Battle: After eight years of litigation, a US court found Microsoft infringed on the patent (Number 5,490,216), resulting in a settlement estimated to be in the low 9 figures (after earlier awards of $388 million, then over $530 million).

Legacy: The technology is widely used globally, and Richardson continued to innovate in cybersecurity, developing new, secure operating system methods.

The irony of stealing product activation is WOW :) welcome to capitalism.

welcome to humanity: do as I say, not as I do

Wow wow wow... wait a moment... I thought HN agreed that the idea of software patents was ludicrous... what happened here that everybody agrees in this case that this was theft??

There's never been any shortage of hypocrisy here when it comes to intellectual property. Terry Pratchett captured it perfectly in Going Postal: “It was a little like stealing. It was exactly like stealing. It was, in fact, stealing. But there was no law against it because no one knew the crime existed, so is it really stealing if what’s stolen isn’t missed? And is it stealing if you’re stealing from thieves? Anyway, all property is theft, except mine.” The modern version of that last sentence would be "Intellectual property isn't real, except mine."

>hypocrisy here

Without self reflection, hypocrisy will emerge naturally.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com