Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Patents Microsoft

Microsoft Patents the Crippling of Operating Systems 394

theodp writes "On Tuesday, Microsoft was granted US Patent No. 7,536,726 (it was filed in 2005) for intentionally crippling the functionality of an operating system by 'making selected portions and functionality of the operating system unavailable to the user or by limiting the user's ability to add software applications or device drivers to the computer' until an 'agreed upon sum of money' is paid to 'unlock or otherwise make available the restricted functionality.' According to Microsoft, this solves a 'problem inherent in open architecture systems,' i.e., 'they are generally licensed with complete use rights and/or functionality that may be beyond the need or desire of the system purchaser.' An additional problem with open architecture systems, Microsoft explains, is that 'virtually anyone can write an application that can be executed on the system.' Nice to see the USPTO rewarding Microsoft's eight problem-solving inventors, including Linux killer (and antelope killer) Joachim Kempin, who's been credited with getting Microsoft hauled into federal court on antitrust charges." Sounds like the mechanism by which Microsoft sells one version of Vista to all users, and lets users upgrade to higher-tier flavors of the OS after cash changes hands.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Patents the Crippling of Operating Systems

Comments Filter:
  • prior art? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by MoFoQ ( 584566 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @04:52PM (#28017359)

    I'd think there would be plenty of prior art, especially in the more general "software" category.
    Shareware for one.
    There was also a "windows 3.x" shell clone back in the day that was also distributed as shareware and I think that limited some functionality.
    Crap...can't remember the name of it...Geo something (sadly...I've been feeling nostalgic and been reading up on old game consoles so the only terms that comes to mind...is neo geo...d'oh)

    What about the Amiga system....the OS was on a chip...and you had to pay to get it or you just had a "limited" (VERY) functioning computer...(more like a big paperweight).

    I'm sure there have been some other lesser known operating systems in the crevices of history that had this "limited functionality" (shareware) mentality.

  • Re:Huh? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by master5o1 ( 1068594 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @04:54PM (#28017387) Homepage
    I suppose they're doing us a service with this patent. Now no one else can deliberately cripple their operating system. I suppose their motive was for that Max-3-Apps thing in the starter versions of 7.
  • Re:Is it just me... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by FooAtWFU ( 699187 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @04:57PM (#28017429) Homepage
    This has been done before in a variety of cases... in particular, there's a variety of hardware platforms running custom operating systems where you can add (say) a "Firewall" license to your router/switch, or an "802.11n" license for your wireless access point. Are these close enough / earlier enough to be Prior Art-y?
  • Paging DEC... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Burdell ( 228580 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @05:00PM (#28017493)

    DEC Unix (aka DEC OSF/1 AXP, Compaq/HP Tru64 Unix) has done this since day one (and IIRC VMS did it before that). You have to enter License PAKs to get all kinds of functionality, including multi-user logins, development tools, cluster support, and AdvFS filesystem utilities.

  • Re:Is it just me... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by BeerCat ( 685972 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @05:00PM (#28017497) Homepage

    Or does this read like the venture into a modularized price structure for an Operating System.

    Sounds like it. :-(

    It may also be a way around anti-bundling lawsuits - "But we didn't bundle a working media player - the user had to pay extra for it"

    ~Hmmm. come to think of it, it sounds awfully like Apple shipping OS X, but charging extra for the fully functional QuickTime Pro

  • by goffster ( 1104287 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @05:02PM (#28017537)

    Somebody paying to patent something no one else wants to do.

  • Prior Art? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Imagix ( 695350 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @05:04PM (#28017571)
    Uh, isn't there scads of prior art, specifically Shareware? Happens to be time-limited until it demands money. Or Doom which let you have the first portion until you paid them, then you got the remaining portions. And there's not much really different between an OS and any other program (fundamentally speaking...). Cheat codes in games?
  • Re:Huh? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by lorenlal ( 164133 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @05:10PM (#28017635)

    I suppose they're doing us a service with this patent. Now no one else can deliberately cripple their operating system. I suppose their motive was for that Max-3-Apps thing in the starter versions of 7.

    And didn't Vista have similar functionality?

    I'm very surprised that this got through. I believe I'm staring at pieces of prior art in the form of a pair of Hypervisors which 'unlock' features after entering a key (stating that I purchased it). These happen to compete against Microsoft's Hyper-V...

    I don't think that any real action will come of this particular patent. It smells to me like they're trying to justify some sort of innovation quota. I really can't see this being enforceable at all... But, I'm not the one arguing this in court either.

  • Re:Huh? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by davester666 ( 731373 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @05:12PM (#28017663) Journal

    They just gave it a name: "Method and technique for getting user to pay money to continue accessing their data".

    If you received a phone call using this technique, the FBI would call it a ransom demand...

  • Re:Who cares? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Foofoobar ( 318279 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @05:13PM (#28017667)
    This isn't just useful for stopping piracy, this is useful by the Feds and the NSA who deal with botnets and foreign agents hacking government agencies. They can send triggers to those machines to disable them. Of course this creates a customer support nightmare but as far as the NSA and Microsoft are concerned, they will just tell everyone they need to buy antivirus from Microsoft or purhcase a new computer from Dell.

    It's a win-win for Microsoft and the feds. And that's all that anyone who will prosecute them cares about.
  • by sorak ( 246725 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @05:17PM (#28017735)

    So does this mean Microsoft is now the only company allowed to do this?

  • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by David Gerard ( 12369 ) <slashdot AT davidgerard DOT co DOT uk> on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @05:37PM (#28018027) Homepage
    Some of it's worth it. Some of it, you're paying for service and components (e.g. on generic x86 servers). The crappy KVM switches and crappy dongles, all true.
  • Re:Huh? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @05:46PM (#28018193)

    Even software, I've seen a package delivered to a company via registered mail that was one piece of paper. For the cost of something well into six digits, it was a piece of paper with license keys on it. The keys didn't activate any functionality (the vendor assumed the customers were paying customers and not pirates, so instead of overtly disabling functionality, the software would say that it was likely not licensed in the logs every week or so), but made the software say, "hey, I'm legit" when a license audit came by.

    However, the ROI on the software was well worth it for the company I worked for.

  • Re:Huh? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ArsonSmith ( 13997 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @06:02PM (#28018417) Journal

    This isn't limited to software either. Here's one I'm just familiar with:

    the YJ Jeep (years 88-96) came with the option of a 19 gallon gas tank. Standard was ~12 gallons. They found it was cheaper to make one gas tank and the standard one had a tube attached to it that would make the pump think it was full at 12 gallons. You can get around this by "topping off" for several minutes while you pump another 7 gallons into a full tank, or you can disassemble the inlet and remove the tube, (about 2" round 8" long) from just under the inlet area. By not taking the upgrade you are actually getting more parts.

    PS. if you own one of these jeeps and want to do it google for it you should be able to find a nice pictorial howto

  • Re:Prior Art (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dpbsmith ( 263124 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @06:02PM (#28018425) Homepage

    "Remember the IBM mainframes where you "upgraded" your hardware to have more disk space or memory by the Customer Engineer flipping a switch?"

    I remember the "waltz-time" IBM 407 electromechanical accounting machines, "programmed" with a wired matrix board and very popular in university computing centers in the 1960s for tasks such as offline printing of punched-card decks in the 1960s.

    They had extra circuitry added to them to make them skip every third processing cycle and run at 2/3 full speed, enabling IBM to sell them at a discounted price without annoying their full-price customers. So they'd go "Kagachunk, kagachunk, (pause), kagachunk, kagachunk, (pause), kagachunk, kagachunk, (pause)." I never personally did it or saw it done, but my understanding was that they could be restored to normal full-speed operation by cutting one wire.

    Here's a good article. [columbia.edu] Wow, it looks new and shiny in that picture... the ones I knew always looked a little shopworn and shabby.

    I assume, but do not know, that the RPG programming language was patterned on the operation of these machines.

  • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Barny ( 103770 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @08:17PM (#28020089) Journal

    U BAI GOLD?

    Another one is the classic "office 2007 trial" that comes on laptops, it is of course the full PRO version of office, so unsuspecting people start using it, they use word, they might have their kids use powerpoint and excel too, but they will also use office Outlook for their mail, and in 60 days time, all their email is held hostage unless they buy the PRO version, whereas usually such users could stick with "home and student" which has mostly what kids and households need.

    That and the following phone calls to microsoft about the issue (they were kinda "nudge nudge" about it being a bonus for me as a retailer, arseholes) led us to pre-install openoffice on all new computers :)

  • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rcharbon ( 123915 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @09:45PM (#28020745) Homepage

    A LOOOONG time ago,I bought a $19.95 4 function Radio Shack Calculator. RS had a similar calculator with additional memory functions for an extra $20. By cutting holes in the case, I gained access to the memory function keys, thus saving 50%.

  • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Larryish ( 1215510 ) <{larryish} {at} {gmail.com}> on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @09:49PM (#28020767)

    What counts as an "app"?

    Office? Probably.

    Firefox? Uhyup, I think so.

    All the different spyware/adware/rootkits/etc that your typical Windows user has clogging their machines? I hope not. Otherwise "3 apps only" would render the machine useless.

  • Re:Huh? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jc42 ( 318812 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @10:42PM (#28021093) Homepage Journal

    Now no one else can deliberately cripple their operating system. I suppose their motive was for that Max-3-Apps thing in the starter versions of 7.

    As others are no doubt pointing out, anyone who wants to challenge this in court can find lots of prior art. In the case of the limit to the number of running apps, this is quite similar to the gimmick that was in Sys/V unix two decades ago, which limited the number of simultaneous logins to 2 unless you paid them extra to change the byte that held the limit.

    Back around 1990 or so, I had a bit of fun with them. Due to problems diagnosing remote login problems, I wrote a login-like program which basically had the same functionality, but it had extensive builtin logging, so you could find out why a login was failing. The program worked as a drop-in replacement for the standard login program, but it missed one feature: It didn't honor the 2-user login limit. When users "complained" (heh!) about this, I pointed out (publicly in several forums) that I'd omitted it because I didn't know where the login limit was stored. I said that if the AT&T folks would tell me where it was hidden, I could add support for the login limit.

    For some reason, we never heard from them, and I was never able to add that feature. They probably figured out that I'd add it as an explicit command-line option, making it trivial for users to disable it if they liked. Also, they probably figured out that, since my program was open-source, anyone would be able to read my code to find out where the login limit was kept, and write their own little program to overwrite that byte.

    In any case, I worked on a number of projects where this stupid limit was one of the listed reasons for not using Sys/V as our platform. We generally thought that delivering a system so crippled and demanding money to fix it was simply tacky, and not something that we wanted to do to our customers. Sometimes I wonder what happened to Sys/V; I haven't seen it in years, and I don't recall reading of it being retired. Of course, it lives on as POSIX, more or less, but the implementations don't use any AT&T (or SCO?) code, so we don't see such limit in the unix part of the industry any more.

    (Or do we? Are some vendors still doing such tacky things to their customers? Other than Microsoft, of course.)

  • Re:Huh? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @11:02PM (#28021219)

    It could be fun having people who pay for Windows 7 Home and hack their way up to Ultimate without paying a single penny.

  • Re:Shareware? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Desert Raven ( 52125 ) on Wednesday May 20, 2009 @02:00AM (#28022201)

    Not just demos. A piece of industrial software I worked on in the 90's was usually paid for in monthly installments. Every month when you paid your bill, you got a new key. Don't pay your bill? It would go into a cripple mode. Once the final payment was made, you were given a key that would work indefinitely.

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday May 20, 2009 @02:35AM (#28022369)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mista2 ( 1093071 ) on Wednesday May 20, 2009 @06:43AM (#28023385)

    Umm, IBM ship PowerPC blades with multiple CPUs' on them, and have most of them disabled untill licences are paid to activate them, giving the systems a down-time-free upgrade on demand.
    Great if you are a start up, and you have your pilot webserver, then the next week demand jumps, so you just pay to unlock more CPUs'.

    I think this patement sounds again like a patent for the frikken-obvious!

Saliva causes cancer, but only if swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time. -- George Carlin

Working...