Microsoft issues DMCA complaint against site hosting Windows 11 ISO

[RedRound2]

12 minutes ago, leadeater said:

It wasn't condescending, you asked why and that is why. Also sure a DMCA was issued as that is the correct mechanism to require someone hosting the content to take it down but that act of doing so is also protecting the trademark Windows.

 

Distribution of Goods and Services comes under trademark as well as copyright.

 

Your question was rhetorical, that's what it seems like anyway, but there actually is an answer to it.

Sigh

I asked a different question. Not "What is DMCA or what is the point of DMCA existence?"

Let me quote myselt, the part you convinently left. I'm not sure if you know this, but context is important

10 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

Besides, what is the point of this DMCA? Even if they take down the website the Windows 11 ISO will still exist in the interwebs until Microsoft officially releases out actual version. Seems like a complete time waste IMO

This DMCA takedown isn't going to change anything. If Windows 12 leaks, it will find its way to interwebs somehow and the precendence of DMCA takedown for 11 isn't going to stop anyone or anything. 

Rather than spending time and money on this, they could've just ignored it and the leaked ISO would pretty much fizzle out as soon as Microsoft releases the beta. Sure, they can take action agaisnt the person who leaked it, but going after people on the internet for taking a look at it, is a bit excessive. It's blaming your own issue on others. And a behmoth like Microsoft can screw up any small time folks easily with this. It just leaves more people in misery while pretty much having no upsides to this

[leadeater]

12 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

This DMCA takedown isn't going to change anything.

It does, as I already answered the first time. It shows Microsoft is protecting their Trademark Windows which they are legally required to do.

[WolframaticAlpha]

[cooky560]

This DMCA does little to prevent spread of the leak, as other posters have mentioned, it feels more like a move to show assertion of their rights, to prevent a risk of endangering said rights (in some jurisdictions not enforcing a copyright breach can be seen as proof that the copyright holder has no interest in the copyright) while allowing the leak to exist long enough to get attention at the same time. 

 

As such iMHO it doesn't do anything to make me believe the leak wasn't intentional

[LAwLz]

I still think there is a good chance Microsoft leaked the ISO on purpose. I really don't think it's that far fetched of an idea. 

 

No watermarks. 

No kill switches. 

It only contains the new start menu and some icons we've already seen and nothing else of the rumored changes. 

Microsoft acknowledged the leak and even made a pin about how there is more to come. 

[Donut417]

15 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

Yeah, it doesn't make sense for Microsoft to leak it. If anything they would lose a lot of wow factor from the June 24th event.

 

Besides, what is the point of this DMCA? Even if they take down the website the Windows 11 ISO will still exist in the interwebs until Microsoft officially releases out actual version. Seems like a complete time waste IMO

Watching Tech Talk with Barneclues, he did go over how Windows development happened  at Microsoft. It seems that Windows is not just ONE team. Its a few different teams who work on different aspects. According to him, most likely the ISO leaked only contained the new UI and nothing more. Which leads me to believe that Microsoft did leak it. It gets people hyped about Windows and hopefully excited for their Event. 

 

As far as the DMCA take down. Microsoft is required by LAW to issue one to protect their copyright/trademark. They have to dot their I's and cross their T's as required by law. They know the take down will do little to stop the spread but that the process required by law. 

[leadeater]

34 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

No kill switches

Do we know that yet? All the past OS Beta builds had them, at least official Beta build obtained through Microsoft. When I was using the Beta versions of Windows Server 2016 they didn't even disclose there was a timed kill until RTM was announced and then that was communicated through the communications channels that the Beta builds had this.

[leadeater]

20 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

As far as the DMCA take down. Microsoft is required by LAW to issue one to protect their copyright/trademark. They have to dot their I's and cross their T's as required by law. They know the take down will do little to stop the spread but that the process required by law. 

Also lets be a real here, issuing a DMCA now days is nothing more than a form document with barely any work at all. It's easy because the framework around DMCA was purposefully made to be quick and simple with challenges specifically left for afterwards.

 

DMCA takedown notices are the "here's one I prepared earlier" cooking show equivalent.

[mr moose]

16 minutes ago, leadeater said:

 

 

DMCA takedown notices are the "here's one I prepared earlier" cooking show equivalent.

But we would never microwave a cat on live TV,  so here's one we prepared earlier...

[LAwLz]

15 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Do we know that yet? All the past OS Beta builds had them, at least official Beta build obtained through Microsoft. When I was using the Beta versions of Windows Server 2016 they didn't even disclose there was a timed kill until RTM was announced and then that was communicated through the communications channels that the Beta builds had this.

I guess we can't be sure if there is some type of killswitch in it like a timed one, but if they had a way of remotely shutting it down then I think they would have have used it already.

 

I also tried turning the date forward on my computer and nothing happened. Doesn't seem like it has a timed killswitch for the next year at least.

[Doobeedoo]

I'll just wait for reveal and final build anyway, no rush. Also who knows what's in that ISO though.

[Donut417]

7 hours ago, leadeater said:

Also lets be a real here, issuing a DMCA now days is nothing more than a form document with barely any work at all. It's easy because the framework around DMCA was purposefully made to be quick and simple with challenges specifically left for afterwards.

 

DMCA takedown notices are the "here's one I prepared earlier" cooking show equivalent.

Even so, it’s the LAW. By not issuing DMCA take downs they weaken their ability to protect their IP and trade marks. 

[Kisai]

9 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Watching Tech Talk with Barneclues, he did go over how Windows development happened  at Microsoft. It seems that Windows is not just ONE team. Its a few different teams who work on different aspects. According to him, most likely the ISO leaked only contained the new UI and nothing more. Which leads me to believe that Microsoft did leak it. It gets people hyped about Windows and hopefully excited for their Event. 

 

As far as the DMCA take down. Microsoft is required by LAW to issue one to protect their copyright/trademark. They have to dot their I's and cross their T's as required by law. They know the take down will do little to stop the spread but that the process required by law. 

I'm not too sure about that.

 

The terms and conditions of basically everything out there say not to violate copyright and trademarks, not to reverse engineer, modify, translate, etc anything, be it the media itself, photos, and video of it. All it takes is for someone, somewhere to get too excited about something and cause a leak.

 

I'd put money on the leak actually being a press-leak rather than a developer leak. eg it was intended for the June 24th presentation and was intended to used to produce screenshots and videos (hence the VM framing Linus pointed out.) Someone likely took it, or the instructions home.

 

 

[Donut417]

1 hour ago, Kisai said:

I'm not too sure about that.

 

The terms and conditions of basically everything out there say not to violate copyright and trademarks, not to reverse engineer, modify, translate, etc anything, be it the media itself, photos, and video of it. All it takes is for someone, somewhere to get too excited about something and cause a leak.

 

I'd put money on the leak actually being a press-leak rather than a developer leak. eg it was intended for the June 24th presentation and was intended to used to produce screenshots and videos (hence the VM framing Linus pointed out.) Someone likely took it, or the instructions home.

 

 

Like I said, they only leaked the ISO with UI changes. Its not 100% of the OS. Also I think its from Microsoft to hype of Windows 11 at the event. I mean how long has it been since someone was actually hyped up about Windows? 

[Arika]

58 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

I mean how long has it been since someone was actually hyped up about Windows? 

This is the part that confused me the most. The biggest complaint I see about windows on this forum is windows update and how they don't like that things keep getting changed and broken. And yet so many people here have been trying to install Windows 11 forcefully.

Some of the people I see complaining are also some of the ones that installed it. It's a very strange dichotomy.

[Donut417]

1 minute ago, Arika S said:

This is the part that confused me the most. The biggest complaint I see about windows on this forum is windows update and how they don't like that things keep getting changed and broken. And yet so many people here have been trying to install Windows 11 forcefully.

Some of the people I see complaining are also some of the ones that installed it. It's a very strange dichotomy.

I aint installing it. Windows 10 is good till 2025, thats how long Ill be using it. Unless my games stop supporting it in the mean time. 

[Arika]

1 minute ago, Donut417 said:

I aint installing it. Windows 10 is good till 2025, thats how long Ill be using it. Unless my games stop supporting it in the mean time. 

I'm sure I'll install it before 2025. But I have no need to, nothing i do is really cutting edge, so unless things just stop working 10 is fine for me. I'll probably just do the same thing i did when i went from 7 to 10. Let other people run 11 to find all the bugs, MS can fix them, then when it's stable i'll switch over. Maybe by the time i'm ready to upgrade my CPU i might just install W11 on a new partition (if it's even out) try it out for a few days, if it's good, keep it, if not, switch back to W10, very little investment.

[wamred]

Oof, but if they did this then is that the 'unofficial official' announcement that Windows 11 exist? 

[GoodBytes]

14 minutes ago, wamred said:

Oof, but if they did this then is that the 'unofficial official' announcement that Windows 11 exist? 

Well Microsoft made several teases with the number 11 in it. Sooooo... people were calling it Windows 11 before the leak.

The surprise isn't the name. The surprise was the interface.

[wamred]

3 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

Well Microsoft make a several teases with the number 11 in it. Sooooo... people were calling it Windows 11 before the leak.

The surprise isn't the name. The surprise was the interface.

Good point, I am looking forward to what Microsoft has to say about this when it happens. Thursday right? 

[GoodBytes]

7 minutes ago, wamred said:

Good point, I am looking forward to what Microsoft has to say about this when it happens. Thursday right? 

Yup! 11am EST (another tease for "11")

[BondiBlue]

9 minutes ago, wamred said:

Good point, I am looking forward to what Microsoft has to say about this when it happens. Thursday right? 

Yes, 6/24 at 11AM EST. 

[Arika]

30 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

Well Microsoft made several teases with the number 11 in it. Sooooo... people were calling it Windows 11 before the leak.

The surprise isn't the name. The surprise was the interface.

here you go MS. a free logo since everyone is going to call it W11, regardless of any "official" name

 

 

[BondiBlue]

23 minutes ago, Arika S said:

here you go MS. a free logo since everyone is going to call it W11, regardless of any "official" name

That's not the logo they're using. 

[Arika]

5 minutes ago, BondiBlue said:

That's not the logo they're using. 

no shit... why would they use a logo made by a random forum user?