Hard to know what he really thought.

If he was really dumb enough to believe that just because you can download the restore disc for free off the Internet and do whatever you want with it then he does deserve to be punished. Prison time though? Nah.

It is a matter of principle vs policy. If what the article states is true, then most of what he was doing is handling those discs to people who already have a licensed product. With a license that is attached to the device anyways. Policy-wise, he might not have the right to do so. In principle tho - nobody lost anything.

How is what he did any different then downloading a coppy of the restore disk form dell or hps website and burning it off your self?

I think in the end he will prevail in appeals, but I think Microsoft is being a tad dark overlord in all of it IMO.

Scubs wrote:

How is what he did any different then downloading a coppy of the restore disk form dell or hps website and burning it off your self?

“Microsoft does not sell restore CDs,” Lundgren said. “Microsoft sells licenses” that enable their software to work, Lundgren said, from $300 for a new operating system to $25 for a license for a refurbisher who wants to resell a computer that does not already have a licensed copy of Windows.

In 2013, federal authorities intercepted shipments of 28,000 restore discs that Lundgren had manufactured in China and sent to his sales partner in Florida. The discs had labels nearly identical to the discs provided by Dell for its computers and had the Windows and Dell logos. “If I had just written ‘Eric’s Restore Disc’ on there, it would have been fine,” Lundgren said.

We probably don't have the full details either. We all know how easy it is to get Windows activated. Add a SLIC to the BIOS and now you can use an OEM ver of Windows. Unknown if that's what was going on here or not to the people he "intended" to sell them to but I wouldn't doubt it. There's alot of "belief" and "intended" word usage in this article..... If he wanted to help the world why didn't he just provide copies of Linux?

“In your opinion, without a code, either product key or COA [Certificate of Authenticity], what is the value of these reinstalla […]
Show full quote

“In your opinion, without a code, either product key or COA [Certificate of Authenticity], what is the value of these reinstallation discs?”

“Zero or near zero,” Weadock said.

Why would anybody pay for one? Lundgren’s lawyer asked.

“There is a convenience factor associated with them,” Weadock said.

So he downloads the restore files and burned them to the CD with custom labels. Then intended them to be sold to refurbishers without a product key since a product key likely isn't necessary.

Microsoft always changes how these activations work but IIRC alot of the restore discs used the same key licensed to the manufacturer and then was tied to the SLIC. The product key on the case was not the key actually used by the restore disc and usually wouldn't work anyway (at least not automagically over the internet). Unknown what versions of Windows he was producing CDs for.

DosFreak wrote:

Microsoft always changes how these activations work but IIRC alot of the restore discs used the same key licensed to the manufacturer and then was tied to the SLIC. The product key on the case was not the key actually used by the restore disc.

That is correct for major OEMs like Dell and HP. But I seen some newer HP restore disks that are tied to just one PC.
I.E. If you had two EliteOne 800's you could not use the same disk to restore both of them.

Personally what stinks the most to me is that he did not get to the point of selling or distributing the discs. OR that's how I read the article. I'm sure there is more to the story. But when I see 100's of listing on ebay for homemade windows recovery's disks I can't help but wonder why this guy and not all the others that did it for profit?

It's a really strange case. It's very uncharacteristic of Microsoft to prosecute "pirates", but that's mostly true about private people using unlicensed copies of their software. 28,000 pressed disks, with logos and all, screams "What the f*ck?" and I guess this is why they actually took him to court. If that precedent was allowed to stand without them interfering, then the following day everyone would be able to sell counterfeit copies of Windows, possibly pre-cracked, with the disclaimer in small print "Do not use if you don't legally own a license". Yeah, right.

The article does not mention which version of Windows was on these disks, and which edition. If it's something like XP or older, without online activation (or with a weak one, like XP, especially with VLK), then he was possibly giving out fully functioning copies of the software, making it easy for potential "pirates", and possibly making profit on it.

This planned obsolescence thing he's talking about is a real thing. Microsoft does have a vested interest in making old licenses hard to use / transfer, so that people may go and buy a new copy of the software. That's why they are not providing easy-to-find 1-click downloads for their restore ISOs - you have to actually hunt for those. Microsoft also likes to push you onto new versions of their OS, and if it encourages you to buy a new PC and helps the hardware vendors who partner with Microsoft - the better. Ugly? Annoying? You bet. But that's what drives the economy forward, too. And it is completely within their right. The license is what it is; Windows is not free software.

He may be completely honest that he was only going to distribute the CDs to refurbishers, not sell them for profit, and if he convinces the judge/jury of this, he may go free. I am sure that Microsoft is fighting here not for actual profits lost, but for the precedent, and for having tighter control of the distribution of their software. However, these are less straightforward claims, and are far less black-and-white (in appearance, if not in essence) than the simple "piracy, counterfeit software, stolen profits" argument.

I wish I could be as certain that he will prevail in appeals, but given the way the big copyright-pushers in the US managed to bend the judicial system to their benefits, I am not certain, and given the overall costs of litigation in the US, I am not sure that even if he does prevail, it won't cost him an arm and a leg.

Hopefully this at least puts a solid dent in the stupid "windows it's abandonware" defenses I see all too often on the internet 🙄 The discs do say "Do not make illegal copies of this disc", can't say you weren't warned.

The safe way would be using the OEM's key sticker and making a recovery partition from of the information of that.

Most oem systems don't even have key stickers anymore nore have I ever seen a restor disk with the "do not make illegal copies " warning. Retail copies of windows, yes, I seen do not make illegal copies on them all the time but not recovery disks thst ship with a pc. Its not to say some do have it stamped on them.