Microsoft names three Auckland pirates
The software giant names, shames and settles with three Auckland PC stores. Two others will see it in court.
Microsoft New Zealand says it has entered settlement agreements with three Auckland PC stores that sold knock-off versions of its software. They are:
TDM Technology, operated by Ayman Franso and Nicholas Jansen;
Pars TV, operated by Al-Huseiny Ibrahim; and
PCTown, run by Linjiang Yu.
Two other companies did not settle with Microsoft, and the matters are before the Auckland District Court.
A spokesman for Microsoft said settlement terms were confidential.
The Auckland busts are the latest in a recent series. In December, Microsoft settled a piracy case with defendant Jun Li, of Auckland, avoiding a trial by agreeing to enter into a High Court judgement for damages of $100,000.
Jun Li had sold around $22,000 worth of fake Microsoft product via TradeMe.
Microsoft Australia senior corporate attorney Vanessa Hutley has previously told NBR that her company favours settlements over prosecution. “We’re not in the business of punishing people or dragging them through the court,” she says. “We want people to realise and admit what they’ve done”.
And what they’ve done, Microsoft maintains is damage the economy. An 2007 study carried out by the Business Software Alliance and market researcher IDC claims that 22% of software sold in New Zealand is pirated, or in breach of licensing (for example, software bought legally for one PC then installed on two), sucking $90 million from the economy.
Pat Huo from local reseller PB Technologies says “When resellers hard load software [install counterfeit or unlicensed product], they steal money from other local businesses and from the customers who pay them for a genuine product.”
Ms Hutley says it can be very difficult to tell genuine Microsoft product from knock-offs, usually made in China, which often include holograms and other details. The company has posted a guide to spotting counterfeit software on its website at Microsoft.com/resources/howtotell.
Signup to free NBR email alerts here
Back to home
Back to top
Print
Email
Share
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Scoopit
NBR SERVICES
SUBSCRIPTIONS
Sign up for NBR subscriber content or email alerts
Latest
Comments and questions18
Another case of the Microsoft pot calling the kettle black. An Australian inventor was last week awarded a $US388 million damages award from Microsoft after a US jury found the software company stole his technology. Ric Richardson, the founder of Uniloc, sued Microsoft in 2003 for violating its patent relating to technology designed to deter software piracy. Looks like its do as I say not as I do as far as Microsoft is concerned.
I'm sorry, but the poster 'tfar' above (anonymous that they are) needs to learn the difference between patent infringement and copyright infringement. There is no criminal liability for patent infringement in the United States: I would like to think warrants toning down the 'company stole his technology' comments at the very least.
One would tend to challenge the validity of a patent as a defence to an infringement action far more often than one would tend to challenge the validity of copyright in a work.
Indeed in the Uniloc case the Microsoft defence was around the validity of the patent.
Now maybe 'tfar' is a big defender of broad patent rights, but, given the rhetoric I would actually guess the opposite is true. My thoughts are pretty transparent if you care to Google- but I tend to favour weaker patent protection and stronger copyright protection generally.
If Microsoft 'did no wrong' Chris $388 million is a fairly big judgement against them.
I hate to see what would have happened if they had stepped out of line in that case
Are these the same pirates who kidnapped an American off the coast of Somalia last week?
Now that we have real pirates, can we please stop associating copyright infringment with boarding a boat on the high seas and holding people hostage? They're quite different in my opinion.
It's not a good thing if legit resellers, like PB Tech, lose business to those who might be able to sell a PC cheaper because they haven't paid for its software.
In terms of the broader picture; yes, some money goes to Microsoft US, but also some to Microsoft NZ and to the reseller.
YARGH!
Tim, get a life.
The whole kidnap thing of the coast off the Somalia was just an american stunt to take the attention away from what is happening at home, keeping the "Obama bot's" happy
It was so out of alignment from the modus operandi for somalia pirates
1. Being the First US flaged ship taken, and a aid ship at that. (US aid ship saved what a headline)
2. No pirate would free 14 hostages to take only one even if he was the captain. The more hostages the more money you are likely to get because the boat full of grain aid isn't worth any thing.
3. The Navy seal shoot out to end it just smells of bull SH*T. 3 head shots in rolling seas at night through a forward hatch...... they forgot to mention the the roll of the forth navy seal he plugged the ozone hole with a 12 inch pea shooter from the forward deck while this was all happening god save America......
Any way to get back on track people only by Microsoft product because they have to not because they what to it just sucks Vista is a good example of a MS failure forced onto users.
Chris Auld AKA Troll
MS almost got away with its piracy. It is still piracy
Micro$oft speaks with forked tongue when it says “We’re not in the business of punishing people or dragging them through the court,” “We want people to realise and admit what they’ve done”. In the Uniloc case Micro$oft drags the case on and on through appeals when it is clearly in the wrong.
Micro$oft are a necessary evil. But they stole the mouse from XEROX, they screwed Netscape over (anyone remember that?), among other things. They make bloated and un-necessary operating systems, ie Vi$ta - which is just a joke - I mean really, why would you like to cut down your pc's overall potential performace by 50%-100%+
for some transparent windows and widgets?
Besides all that, I still use Windows(XP),
however I guess thats why they are loaded and are able to subvert all the lawsuits.
If your not happy just look on youtube for the Bill Gates Pie Face video - Its sure to make you smile.
I rang Mircosoft about what I thought were over cheap versions of Microsoft office on Trademe . I wanted to be sure I was gettting the real deal. They were not interested in talking to me and pretty much said they will be fine.
The first poster wasn't insisting it was a copyright violation, he was simply drawing attention to Microsoft's hypocrisy in realm of what has come to be known as Intellectual Property.
If you really want a copyright violation, go no further than Bill Gates, who, when caught operating illegally copied software in a public demonstration, calmly rebutted the accusation of wilful theft and responded that it was simply an unlicenced copy, not subject to criminal sanction.
Microsoft has indulged in this kind of behaviour for many years; the first case I'm aware of was that of Stac Electronics back in the nineties where they were fined $120 million dollars. But by the time (several years) they were held liable, that was peanuts to Microsoft.
If MS didn't break so many laws meant to make markets more fair then I might feel sorry for them missing out on some of their fortune.
All the money paid for MS products goes to the US, it doesn't affect our economy.
Copying information damages the economy? Nope, it is copying that allows the same information to benefit more people. Disclosure of information cannot be unlawful unless the person has contracted not to, or owes a duty of secrecy to the person they got it from. That is under natural law and the common law and not counting fiat laws imposed on people artificially.
Did it occur to anyone else that these people shouldnt be named and shamed if theyve already settled? Doesnt that mean that theyve paid their debt to the Microsoft who should therefore leave them alone and not drag their names through the mud. And why then do they not advertise the names of the companies who are going through court? Who knows, maybe the people who settled werent guilty but couldnt afford to face a lengthy legal battle with Microsoft, i know its not something id relish! so dont go assuming that these people are awful pirateers, theyve owned up to their actions and paid their dues and it shouldnt continue to negatively affect their buisness.
None of the three resellers in the story above had confidentially clauses in their Microsoft settlements.
As a consumer, I'm interested in knowing their identity.
I can appreciate your argument about a larger party giving in to a smaller party because they can't afford the cost - but knowing the Microsoft people involved, I'm certain this is not the case. Resellers have historically decided to settle after Microsoft has shown the court the volume of evidence it's collected against them.
Post new comment or question
To share this article, click on a service below