The guy is full of shit, but so is Microsoft. The travesty here is that the justice system sided with the corporate gorilla in a commercial issue that should be solved in a civil court. There is no greater social value at stake here, there is zero public interest in criminally enforcing Microsoft's licensing scheme and their various loopholes designed to maximize revenue.

The case wasn't brought by Microsoft, it was brought by Federal Prosecutors, who had the information given to them by the U.S Customs service.

https://1gew6o3qn6vx9kp3s42ge0y1-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-...

Of course there’s a public interest in blocking counterfeiting scams.

It's their software and they can do whatever they want with it. The real travesty here is thinking that just because Windows is widely used it should be given away.

I agree with the sentiment, but in this case it appears the discs were just being used to restore software that was still legally licensed to the computer. But license issues aside, it seems this guy was conspiring to commit fraud through the customs/import process too.

I presume you distribute everything you create for free?

he didn't say the guy deserves to get away with it, though

he said the guy should be sued in civil court and be made to pay damages, rather than sent to prison by a criminal court

It seems that this "manufacturing counterfeits" is literally just copying Windows CDs:

> Lundgren made 28,000 of the discs and shipped them to a broker, who planned to sell them to computer refurbishing shops for about 25 cents each, so they could provide them to used-computer buyers.

> Microsoft’s lawyers valued the discs at $25 each and said they represent $700,000 in potential sales.

Firstly I think it's a harsh sentence (because copying isn't theft[0]), but secondly can anyone tell me why on earth he didn't just burn some Debian discs? (Perhaps with LXDE if it's really old computers.)

[0]: https://youtu.be/IeTybKL1pM4

He didn't just copy the software content of the disc. He reproduced the printing and labelling of the originals, and kept refining his product to look more similar to the original so they'd get through customs.

He wasn't always selling them for 25cents. There are documents from him where he's selling them for $20.

> He reproduced the printing and labelling of the originals, and kept refining his product to look more similar to the original so they'd get through customs.

Ok, I think that may justify using the word "counterfeit" then.

> There are documents from him where he's selling them for $20.

The thing is, it would have been perfectly legal for him to sell Debian CDs for $20. That would still have made the old computers usable again. It's good to make use of old computers, but I think the implied argument of having to copy Windows recovery CDs to save old computers is nonsense.

The story just puzzles me. Maybe he didn't realise that you can sell free software[1]?

[1]: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html

Oh, well, if he copied the labels that really makes a world of difference!

It demonstrates dishonesty, which is what turns this from someone not knowing what they're doing into someone making the choice to engage in criminal behaviour.

All of his protestation - "I was only selling them for cost" (a lie), and "I was trying to extend the life of computers" (linux would have done that, and the free downloads of Windows would have done that) - is the defence he tried to mount against the criminal charge.

That defence was rejected by the court.

>> Lundgren made 28,000 of the discs and shipped them to a broker, who planned to sell them to computer refurbishing shops for about 25 cents each, so they could provide them to used-computer buyers.

>> Microsoft’s lawyers valued the discs at $25 each and said they represent $700,000 in potential sales.

Something doesn't match: on the Microsoft's page I get:

"one transaction alone generated $28,000 in revenue for Mr. Lundgren and his co-defendant from the sale of 8,000 discs."

Which means his revenue was $3.5 pro disc in that case.

Interestingly, in both cases the number 28,000 is specified.

> can anyone tell me why on earth he didn't just burn some Debian discs?

Because Windows is what the typical American PC user expects and is familiar with.

Yea, ok. But then Windows itself has changed so much, that something like XFCE arguably feels more like XP/Vista than Windows 8 or 10 does. From my personal observation the Charms Bar especially appears to confuse people. (Or, did he in fact put Windows XP on those older computers? If so, then that's also highly irresponsible, as it doesn't receive any security updates!)

So I wonder why Lundgren has been going out of his way to face potential criminal prosecution, fines and jail time in order to provide what most people arguably might more familiar with? I don't get his cost/benefit analysis.

People still install Windows software on their computers; among other things there are still printers and other peripherals with drivers that are only available for Windows (as insane as that may seem in this day and age). It is not just familiarity with the UI.

I've experienced this cut both ways though.

At our print studios we have one printer that works with Windows and not GNU/Linux and one where it's the other way around.

>Because Windows is what the typical American PC user expects and is familiar with.

Without the "American".

Probably no Linux because these were intended to be used with old computers sold to consumers. And regardless of the merits of Linux, virtually no average consumer is going to purchase a computer without Windows.

> virtually no average consumer is going to purchase a computer without Windows.

What about the devices that Apple and Google are selling? (No endorsement implied)