Ooh, a well written, intelligent reply (from Julia Phillpot), David Hall writes. I wonder how long she'll last. Shame she can't back the 'If anything, the figures questioned by Mr. Lea are more likely to be an understatement as to the extent of software piracy, rather than an inflation of the issue.'with any facts though. I thought supplying goods that were not fit for purpose was also a criminal act, but I don't hear Microsoft campaigning for software licence's that state it is. Now if Microsoft spent more time making its software more reliable, and less on bells and whistles, and anti piracy campaigns, I'd be more impressed.
"However, our business and that of every software company is completely dependent on the protection of the intellectual property rights. Without this fundamental protection, the software side of the IT industry simply wouldn't evolve." What she fails to mention ( saysJonathan Wilson
) is the need for MS to code buggy software so we are forced into upgrading when the original cash cow runs out, without that the MS merry go round would simply not evolve at the massive pace it has so far. ®Related stories MS piracy losses claims don't stack up -Graham Lea Right of Reply: MS says stealing is wrong Register readers weigh in Y does not mean X : decoding the MS reply Software piracy stops software development? MS anti-piracy tactics snare innocent dealers How would Graham Lea like having his IP infringed? Phillpot calls piracy kettle black
Sponsored: Webcast: Simplify data protection on AWS