This was originally a post I made in the Tech News forum, and concerns the data-collection of Windows 10.

Nobody has agreed to grant Microsoft rights to their personal data by purchasing or installing Windows - and all data that is personally generated by a person's hardware, their owned software-licenses, their time, and their electricity costs, is their personally-owned data, and represents work that a person's property created, through their owner's personal expense, and time. Further, I believe it would not be legally-defensible for Microsoft to imply anywhere in their EULA that they do have such rights to people's personal data - noting that EULAs are not laws, but are subject to laws, and noting that there are legal protections against unfair contract terms, which I believe any clause claiming a person's personally-owned data becomes Microsoft's would be a perfect example of (and without such a claim, Microsoft cannot legally claim a right to take people's data).
 
I would say that this applies to the taking of data at any level, but Windows 10 doesn't allow for complete shut-off of all data-stealing, so let's just go with the most basic level of data-taking for this point, which will also be the least-disputable:
When Microsoft unilaterally takes peoples data, it's stealing what doesn't belong to it, what was generated by someone else's work and property,  and what the person that data belongs to is not being compensated for. It's piracy, and it's the very same piracy as a gamer downloading games they didn't pay for, and deriving benefit from them, such as entertainment - or productivity and money, if it's a productivity application, or maybe an OS. It's the taking of data which a person does not own, for benefit.
 
How can Microsoft claim to be anti-piracy, when they are the biggest committers and condoners (by example) of piracy in the world?
 
And, if Microsoft unilaterally decides that it is entitled to pirate everyone's data form them, so that they can make profit off of that data, then why should everyone else not pirate Microsoft's software? What justification exists that would support a double-standard, where software developers base their business-model upon piracy, yet individuals should be expected to pay for software from people and companies who are stealing their personal data, and profiting off of it?
 
Something to think about, which I think the answer is obvious in being that Microsoft's data-collection is a major issue, and is criminal, and sets the example that it's OK for people to take whatever data they want, without paying for it, and without permission - which is software piracy. I don't think that should be the case, and I don't think that's what's right, but that's what Microsoft's conduct is saying is right, in their view, and is setting the example for other people to follow.
 
And the same also applies regarding the conduct of other companies that do the same thing, such as Nvidia.

Again, data that is created by a person's bought hardware and software licenses, which is produced by their system's processing power and resources, on the person's own time, and using the person's own paid-for electricity is theirs, and property rights apply to it. For Microsoft, Nvidia, or anyone to unilaterally take that data for their own purposes, and for them to profit off of it (which they do), is for them to commit data-theft, and to profit off of the proceeds of crime. Essentially, Microsoft and developers who behave similarly are criminal organizations.