Windows 10 Ameliorated Ordered to cease operations due to LTT video

[Master Disaster]

10 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

In the end its the same, user get OS without paying......

Except that one use case fall inside of the EULA while the other doesn't. Your argument is basically like saying "its OK to pirate any paid app that also has a free version because the outcome is the same either way".

[RageTester]

As I see it, WIN 7 still works without problems. I don't see myself using any version of win 10...

The only reason I am not using Win XP is because websites and wifi stopped working. The more lightweight OS the better.

[jagdtigger]

31 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Except that one use case fall inside of the EULA while the other doesn't.

AFAIK no, there is a x day period you can but after that its just as illegal.

[RejZoR]

In all honesty, the whole project was a pointless joke. What's the point of having this cut down broken OS that is more unpredictable than Windows itself. May just as well use Linux then. Would have billion times better experience.

 

If it had just trimmed down regular ISO with removed preinstalled junk and telemetry just cut down for the most part without breaking anything, then fair enough. But the extent of disabling things they went was just silly and pointless.

[Master Disaster]

15 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

AFAIK no, there is a x day period you can but after that its just as illegal.

Not really. There are implications that MS are OK with users running unactivated indefinitely .

 

Microsoft built in the ability for Windows to lock unactivated users out of customisation features, almost like a trial version plus they also removed the feature where by the OS would stop you from using your PC after 30 days if it wasn't activated.

 

There's a VERY big difference from running the OS as it was provided and not activating it at all compared to modifying the OS to trick it into thinking it has been activated.

 

One technically breaks the EULA but only does so because MS allows it to. The other is straight up piracy.

[jagdtigger]

4 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

One technically breaks the EULA but only does so because MS allows it to. The other is straight up piracy.

From a legal standpoint both are the same regardless if MS turns a blind eye or not.

[emosun]

20 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

In all honesty, the whole project was a pointless joke. What's the point of having this cut down broken OS that is more unpredictable than Windows itself. May just as well use Linux then. Would have billion times better experience.

 

If it had just trimmed down regular ISO with removed preinstalled junk and telemetry just cut down for the most part without breaking anything, then fair enough. But the extent of disabling things they went was just silly and pointless.

Its not for you. Its for the 20% of people that wanted hardware compatibility and nothing else from 10. Cant blame them they didnt remove anything worth while from the os

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Its no different than someone downloading the official ISO from then goes ahead and use it unactivated......
(without timelimit with some very easily by-passable limitations, MS doesnt care about average joe using their OS without license, they just want the data......)

Yes but the ISO being provided is not activated and has inbuilt trial period and activation requirements and enforcement of those. Makes zero difference if you hack your way around that without Microsoft's help. Being able to do something doesn't change the legality of the problem. Providing activated copies of Windows is piracy, hell even hosting the official Microsoft ISO is piracy as you don't have a redistribution license, unless you have one which few have.

[jagdtigger]

22 minutes ago, leadeater said:

activation requirements

Thats the thing, there is none. You can install it and use without PD key, it wont nag about it either. You loose some customization  options but thats about it.

[Master Disaster]

51 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

From a legal standpoint both are the same regardless if MS turns a blind eye or not.

No, it really isn't. Microsoft allow Windows 10 to operate in unactivated mode, they wrote that function in and they removed functions that prevented it in other versions of Windows.

 

It might be technically against the EULA but if it ever made it to court there's not a judge on the planet that would side with MS on that one. The EULA is unenforceable since MS themselves provide the means to circumvent it built right into the software.

[Trik'Stari]

10 hours ago, WereCatf said:

That's irrelevant, though. Offering pre-activated copies of Windows 10 for download is piracy. How many people actually download it isn't relevant as to whether it is or isn't piracy.

And yet you can get pretty much the same thing from MS for free, using Windows for Assistive Technologies.

 

Which they have said in the past "they don't care if people download it".

[WereCatf]

1 minute ago, Trik'Stari said:

And yet you can get pretty much the same thing from MS for free, using Windows for Assistive Technologies.

 

Which they have said in the past "they don't care if people download it".

But that's irrelevant. Microsoft owns Windows, they can do whatever they want with it. Someone else offering modified Windows for download is piracy, even if it doesn't functionally make much sense.

[strajk-]

8 hours ago, emosun said:

it existed for months and months and was ordered to stop mere hours after the video released so care to give your own explanation?

 

I don't have to, no matter what you say, saying LTT was the reason without any evidence is literally conjecture, and I don't like to feed into conspiracy theories, I like evidence, and your claims so far is a classic representation of correlation not equaling causation. 

The burden of proof lies on you, once there is actual factual evidence it was due to LTT that it was shut down, I'll concede. 

[Guyver1]

https://github.com/Sycnex/Windows10Debloater

 

That's all you ever needed.

[Master Disaster]

4 minutes ago, strajk- said:

I don't have to, no matter what you say, saying LTT was the reason without any evidence is literally conjecture, and I don't like to feed into conspiracy theories, I like evidence, and your claims so far is a classic representation of correlation not equaling causation. 

The burden of proof lies on you, once there is actual factual evidence it was due to LTT that it was shut down, I'll concede. 

The facts are this..

 

They project was asked to cease distribution of the modified ISO

The project has not been shut down

We don't know who asked them to cease

We don't know why they were asked to cease

 

The idea that MS would have a C&D ready to serve within an hour of a video going live is laughable tbh.

[SFFDesigns]

10 hours ago, Centurius said:

You clearly weren't here back when Windows 10 initially released. People were happily giving up DX12 and any other creature comfort the new OS offered by sticking to 7.

Yep I wasn’t into gaming back then, so I wasn’t aware of that. Makes sense though

[Delicieuxz]

1 hour ago, Master Disaster said:

The facts are this..

 

They project was asked to cease distribution of the modified ISO

The project has not been shut down

We don't know who asked them to cease

We don't know why they were asked to cease

 

The idea that MS would have a C&D ready to serve within an hour of a video going live is laughable tbh.

I wouldn't find it surprising. I expect Microsoft's legal department would have C&Ds of various formats on file ready to be whipped-out at a moment's notice, and that other parts of the company might have the ability to send one out if they hear of a violation.

 

They might be sending C&Ds out regularly, as well as actively looking for instances of copyright violations just like record labels get YouTube videos censored all the time via copyright claims.

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

Thats the thing, there is none. You can install it and use without PD key, it wont nag about it either. You loose some customization  options but thats about it.

That has nothing to do with activation, unless you put a key in, activate via known hardware GUID or signing in with your Microsoft account and register your computer to that account you are not activated. Those are the requirements, don't do that you are not legally activated and are either in trial period or violation of license, there's no third option of "do nothing" and not be in violation of license.

 

But I know you know this so why are you even bothering? This isn't an opinion matter, that's just how it is.

[TheCoverUp]

1 hour ago, Trik'Stari said:

And yet you can get pretty much the same thing from MS for free, using Windows for Assistive Technologies.

 

Which they have said in the past "they don't care if people download it".

The page dosen't exist anymore so you can't get it for free

[Master Disaster]

17 minutes ago, leadeater said:

That has nothing to do with activation, unless you put a key in, activate via known hardware GUID or signing in with your Microsoft account and register your computer to that account you are not activated. Those are the requirements, don't do that you are not legally activated and are either in trial period or violation of license, there's no third option of "do nothing" and not be in violation of license.

 

But I know you know this so why are you even bothering? This isn't an opinion matter, that's just how it is.

But like I said earlier, the part of the EULA that says you must be activated to be licensed would be deemed unenforceable since Microsoft provide the ability for users to do exactly that built right into the OS.

 

It would be like someone selling a car that does 200 but adding a restriction that says if it is ever driven above 150 the warranty becomes void.

 

Just because they say it doesn't mean its legally enforceable.

 

TBH at this point I genuinely believe Microsoft don't care about users running outside of the license agreement anyway. My guess would be legal have advised that the policies remain unchanged as to not admit to this publicly but since they basically provide this ability built right in I can't see how they can care. To be clear though, them not caring about it doesn't automatically mean its OK either. Its a complicated situation.

[jagdtigger]

28 minutes ago, leadeater said:

 there's no third option of "do nothing" and not be in violation of license.

I never said there was, i just pointed out that using the iso downloaded from the site is no different than running the official image from MS unactivated indefinitely... Both violation, MS wont see money in either case, but for some reason MS turns a blind eye over the latter.......

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, jagdtigger said:

I never said there was, i just pointed out that using the iso downloaded from the site is no different than running the official image from MS unactivated indefinitely... Both violation, MS wont see money in either case, but for some reason MS turns a blind eye over the latter.......

But there is a difference.

 

MS own Windows and if they want to offer a free version of it they can, there's nothing stopping them. They can, quite literally, do as they please with their own software.

 

Somebody else providing a copy of Windows that contains a method of circumventing activation is piracy.

[leadeater]

16 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

But like I said earlier, the part of the EULA that says you must be activated to be licensed would be deemed unenforceable since Microsoft provide the ability for users to do exactly that built right into the OS.

No Microsoft does not provide a way for you to circumvent activation. If you don't activate you have the water mark saying you are not and features are disabled, there's only the legal way to remove that i.e. Activation or the illegal way.

 

EULA is not a license entitlement, that's actually got nothing to do with your legal right to use the software only what you can do with a legal right to use it. Without a legal right to use it EULA is irrelevant.

 

Edit:

Legal right to use software is a DMCA issue btw, which is very enforceable.

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

No Microsoft does not provide a way for you to circumvent activation. If you don't activate you have the water mark saying you are not and features are disabled, there's only the legal way to remove that i.e. Activation or the illegal way.

 

EULA is not a license entitlement, that's actually got nothing to do with your legal right to use the software only what you can do with a legal right to use it. Without a legal right to use it EULA is irrelevant.

Fair enough.

 

I see it slightly differently though. They're not providing a way to circumvent activation but they are, for all intents & purposes, offering an indefinite free trial.

[NumLock21]

The real reason is the stripped down version, cannot phone home. Microsoft don’t like that, how else are they going to send you targeted ads when they don’t know your shopping habit.