Microsoft patents means of limiting software
Microsoft on Tuesday was granted a patent for a way of limiting access to certain features of an operating system depending on whether a user has paid for those features.
The patent, titled "Restricted software and hardware usage on a computer," covers a means by which it can offer software that has features either enabled or not enabled depending on which edition a user has purchased. It's a concept already in use at the company.
Microsoft has already said it will offer all versions of Windows 7 on a single disc, with a particular product key unlocking the features that come with that edition. Users will be able to upgrade to a higher-end version of Windows 7 just by purchasing a new product key, Microsoft has said.
It is not clear that the patented technology is used for this, although the two sound very similar to me. One piece of the application deals with the scenario in which "a consumer initially purchases a computer with restricted functionality at a price that is less than the price that would be charged for a computer with full functionality."
"Subsequently, the user can, at an additional cost, acquire a digital key that allows the restrictions to be removed, upgrading the computer to full functionality," Microsoft said.
Although Microsoft has long touted the general-purpose nature of Windows, it notes in its patent applications the need to offer different versions with different features.
"One problem inherent in open architecture systems is they are generally licensed with complete use rights and/or functionality that may be beyond the need or desire of the system purchaser," Microsoft said. "Consequentially, the purchase price of these systems being indifferent to usage scenarios means users with limited needs pay the same rate for these systems as those with universal needs."
With Windows, there have long been home and professional versions. During its long life span, Windows XP also added the Starter, Media Center, and Tablet PC editions.
With Vista, Microsoft added the Home Premium, Enterprise, and Ultimate versions. In that case, users could also move from one version to another, although it required the use of a separate disk.
The awarding of the patent was noted earlier on Wednesday on Slashdot.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
Making useless and inflammatory comments with the the intent to disrupt and cause problems, that's what trolls are best at.
To borrow a phrase you are prone to digging up, "that's the pot calling the kettle black".
Something to think about, AppleRocks1963. Apple is guilty of this as well. Please be sure to include them in your bashing attempts to be fair.
Care to admit you're grasping at straws here?
1. As a distribution mode, this is pretty convenient. I like the hypothetical scenario of having the entire Microsoft product suite on one DVD, accessible locally, and by simply paying for additional products, install and use them right away rather than going back to a store or waiting for big downloads to finish.
2. As a feature rights management, it will inevitably be cracked, and if I am so inclined, I will be able to use more of the software than I actually paid for.
This technology can only screw Microsoft or Microsoft customers. If you are a Microsoft hater and assured of your position, you probably should applaud this to accelerate the Evil Empire's downfall.
As a Windows user, I think the implementation of this technology could allow Microsoft to price its products lower (actually, as a pessimist, I reckon the rate of price inflation will likely just decrease). I depend on third-party products to populate my environment, so not having to pay the price for redundant Windows features I won't be using would be very welcome.
Obviously not. This isn't new, and not uncommon with big software packages. You do an install, and unlock features with keys.
Just because your ignorant doesn't say anything about MS.
Also, I think Microsoft could be heading in the direction of a freely downloadable base version that anyone can install. This should combat piracy at the small store level. Being free, the small vendor can install the base version instead of a pirated version, or worse (from Microsoft's POV), a linux distro.
The consumer can then buy an upgrade kit from any reseller (or online) which has the upgrade code to the user's desired feature level. When inputted, the base install will unlock, or download, the feature sets he acquired a license for.
Not that I've avoided the phrase "feature set the user desires," since it's likely that MS will strategically bundle (a euphemism) sets in a "if you want this, you have to get this" fashion.
Normally ballmerisanape is a pro-mac fan, but here.. well, I suppose he's a bit 'out of touch' himself.
More proof the patent system is severely broken I guess.
Anyone know for sure one way or the other and care to enlighten us?
There must be something different that they must have claimed to get this patent.
Looks like a preventative measure against patent trolling to me.
Different sides of the coin?
OTOH, it'll be fun to buy version X of Windows, unlock and install it and then later decide I need more features. So I buy them and hope that they install correctly. Ought to be fun.
I doubt it. There's prior art on unlocking features going back decades. (I once spent 6 weeks trying to to our corporate accountants why there was no receiving document for a $10,000 purchase from AT&T - they just dialed into our PBX and enabled a new feature)
Depending on how it is written, IMO, this has an excellent chance of being nullified the first time they try to enforce it.
Unless this causes people to finally challenge the patent office to clean up it's act, I see nothing good coming from this.
How about you paying all of us every time we have to read your idiotic comments?
If you aren't going to contribute anything useful to the conversation, then please keep your comments to yourself.
@Monkeyfun, rubenerd, kcotham- you three also did nothing to add to the conversation and should have kept quiet. t8 would have looked all more the fool for having silence greet their trolling attempt.
You are a pompous, self-righteous, rude, arrogant, jerk with nothing of value to contribute ever. You are incapable of writing anything without some insult interlaced into it. You are capable of nothing more than "I know you are, but what am I?" sorts of arguments. Do us all a favour and go back to your Windows programming and leave us the hell alone.
This whole move along with having 7 different versions designed to confuse consumers, one version of which only allows three applications to run at a time (lunacy) shows how completely out of touch Microsoft is with their customer base. It's a shame, because Windows 7 has the potential to be much less of a headache to use than previous versions.
The sad thing is, they can get away with it, and they will.
Microsoft could play that quite well- With Windows you, the customer, get to make the choice of what you want to buy and use. You are not forced to buy things you do not want.
Just a consideration to show that you can take the same situation and spin it in both ways quite effectively.
(It's the same way they tried to force through that atrocious OOXML "standard" through the standards process. Money talks, lots of money talks loudly.)
How did this patent get through in the first place?
Lot's of companies control feature sets based on PAKs (Product Activation Keys) and have for years.
If Microsoft goes after other companies that use this process, then it's a bad thing. If they do this only to prevent patent trolls from going after Microsoft, then it will be a good thing for them.
In the end, it's the patent system that made this necessary. :P
"Glad OS X has that feature built into the operating system itself. ROFL. Pay for spell check? ROFL"
And those people who use it are even more foolish. Pay for spell check? Who would USE spell check? Simply learn to spell correcty in the first place and you won't run into this issue in the first place.
Is it ironic that my Mac spell checker has highlighted "dimeing" as misspelled (how else would you spell dime-ing; "diming" is marked as misspelled as well?) and suggests I actually mean "dimming"?
;-)
One comment stated that it would limit Microsoft but not their competition. Just the opposite. Anyone using a key to unlock additional features will have to pay Micro$oft a license fee or risk being sued.
Its incredible to me how the PTO can grant these kinds of patents. Hope someone with deep pockets can challenge this patent.
- by danmar37 May 24, 2009 3:59 AM PDT
- Can you say Windows by subscription? Will they start selling time-limited licenses?
- Reply to this comment
-
(56 Comments)