International Law

More Sympathy for Microsoft

By Stan

I’ve been a bit of a booster for Microsoft’s recent anti-piracy efforts and have even praised on a number of occasions the Black Screen of Death. Others have followed suit, the latest being Imagethief:

This is one of those unusual occasions on which I feel genuine sympathy for Microsoft, which has a hard time catching a break in China.

I agree with Will. It is difficult to feel sympathy with a corporate behemoth, but after so many PR slamdowns in the PRC, it’s difficult not to.

In this case, the Black Screen of Death seems to be a pretty good tech solution to a problem, IPR infringement of digital works, that defies normal enforcement measures. The major mistake that Microsoft seems to have made in this case (and I am rather shocked to hear this) is that it did not consult with the Chinese government before rolling out the Black Screen in the PRC. Must be a story behind this somewhere, unless the whole deal was done offshore in a centralized fashion, and the folks in charge were clueless about local issues. Possible, I guess.

I led a discussion about the Black Screen of Death last week with my IP students. The biggest surprise I had was the misinformation out there. I started off by asking them what the anti-piracy tech actually did, and I received quite a varied response. Most of the students were convinced that the Black Screen included severe loss of functionality, which is absolutely untrue to my understanding.

These were law students who, although they may not be tech geniuses, at least have some brains and education. For them to form their opinions on an issue like this based on sketchy news reports (many of which I forced them to read) is troubling, to say the least.

This does explain, however, the nasty shit going on in chat rooms all over the country. How many of these critics are being driven by spurious reports that the Black Screen is a virus, that it destroys your hard drive/motherboard/pacemaker, that it is a hyperdimensional gateway that allows demons to jump into your brain, etc.?

Readers of this blog know that I am not a knee-jerk IP lawyer that sides with industry in every case. However, what Microsoft is doing here is incredibly benign and it targets infringers. Moreover, the only loss of functionality for users (the desktop image) is a function of the software that is being pirated. Are critics really arguing that Microsoft owes a certain level of quality to infringers?

To wrap this up, it should be noted that the government’s reaction to this is a bit warped. Imagethief ties this in nicely with development policy:

In fact, Imagethief thinks that Microsoft is right to enforce its intellectual property rights more vigorously in China. Imagethief also thinks that Chinese computer users really need to get over the idea that they can knock off Windows (and just about every other bit of software) for free forever. Forget the relatively modest implications for Microsoft. The practice is lethal to Chinese software companies, some of which deserve a better shake, and undermines the premise of domestic innovation, which is one of the pillars of the current 11th Five Year Plan.

Preaching to the choir.

Full post as published by China Hearsay on November 18, 2008 (boomark / email).