Hot Take Upcoming Windows 11 builds won't have the ability to install without internet connectivity and a Microsoft Account.

[Sunshine-boy]

Absolutely not true at all. The EU has some of the most strict software piracy and copyright/intellectual piracy laws in the world. In fact, there is an entire division of Interpol devoted to tracking down software pirates and other copyright infringers.

It is illegal across the EU to download copyrighted material without consent and without paying for it, despite there is not enough law enforcement to chase all of you pirates down and prosecute you. Pirates are just getting away with it, which does not make it legal or make it ethical or moral.

At this point, nobody here can take you seriously because you spout a lot of nonsense. You think you know the law, but you do not.

Every nation should crackdown hard on software piracy, game module piracy, torrenting, software cracking, etc. The fines alone would fund many social welfare programs.

Put software pirates into prison? I think that is a completely fair solution. Afterall, software pirates are criminals. They are thieves.

If an ISP detects a person downloading copyrighted material without paying for it (using torrents), then they should be required to report it to the police. Then the police can sent a 1000 Euro fine/ticket for a first time offense. If the pirate does not pay the fine, then prosecute them further and put them into prison. Better yet, force them to perform hard labor at the end of an AK-47 with a bayonet attached. Then make them pay even more fines.

First off, the claim that today's Windows and Office piracy is "at the highest levels ever" is far from a slam-dunk argument. Modern software distribution relies heavily on online activation, cloud-based services, and subscription models (like Microsoft 365), all of which make piracy harder to execute and sustain. Back in the early 2000s, things were different—piracy was rampant with physical discs and simpler product keys. So, it's a bit of a stretch to argue that piracy is worse now than before when the system has evolved to combat it. Looks like somebody needs to update their timeline! On the point about lost revenue, while piracy does result in financial impact, estimating "at least $40 billion" is based on the questionable assumption that every pirated copy would have been a legitimate purchase. That’s like saying if everyone who window-shops bought the dress, retailers would be trillionaires. Reality check: many pirates wouldn’t buy the software at its retail price anyway.

And as for the freeloaders and criminals bit—well, let’s not oversimplify. Studies suggest that some pirates end up being paying customers in the future, especially in emerging markets where initial affordability is a barrier. So, piracy isn't entirely a one-sided narrative of theft.

Lastly, about the EU—while it’s true they have strict intellectual property laws, enforcement isn’t black-and-white Many nations focus their resources on larger-scale commercial piracy rather than individual cases. No, nobody’s lurking with a bayonet to chase down casual torrent users.

 

[Sunshine-boy]

This will be my last word on this:

Its still stealing no matter how hard people try to justify it. If you can't afford it then don't steal it, I would like a Ferrari but am not going to steal one.

Software piracy and stealing a Ferrari aren't really the same thing. If someone pirates software, the original owner still has their "copy". it’s more like someone sneaking into a museum to admire the art without buying a ticket. With a Ferrari, though, if you steal it, someone’s garage is suddenly very empty, and the cops might be after you.

Also, the value gap here is wild. Comparing a luxury car to a digital product that can be replicated infinitely with minimal cost? That’s like saying sneaking an extra cookie from the jar is the same as robbing Fort Knox.

Instead of using these extreme comparisons, maybe it’s worth focusing on why piracy happens in the first place: affordability, accessibility, and, yes, sometimes laziness. Tackling the root causes with better solutions might actually address the issue rather than equating it to grand theft auto.

 

[bazang]

First off, the claim that today's Windows and Office piracy is "at the highest levels ever" is far from a slam-dunk argument. Modern software distribution relies heavily on online activation, cloud-based services, and subscription models (like Microsoft 365), all of which make piracy harder to execute and sustain. Back in the early 2000s, things were different—piracy was rampant with physical discs and simpler product keys. So, it's a bit of a stretch to argue that piracy is worse now than before when the system has evolved to combat it. Looks like somebody needs to update their timeline! On the point about lost revenue, while piracy does result in financial impact, estimating "at least $40 billion" is based on the questionable assumption that every pirated copy would have been a legitimate purchase. That’s like saying if everyone who window-shops bought the dress, retailers would be trillionaires. Reality check: many pirates wouldn’t buy the software at its retail price anyway.

Microsoft loses in excess of S10,000,000,000 USD revenue in China per year due to Windows piracy. This is an official statement made by Microsoft CEO Ballmer years back. China. One country. $10 in revenue losses. But none of you bother to research or read much of anything.

Microsoft's losses due to software piracy are greater than $40 billion USD because Windows piracy is at a huge scale.

Any software pirate is a thief. A criminal who should be prosecuted.

 

[bazang]

Piracy doesn’t control pricing, The cost of Windows isn’t simply based on how many pirated copies exist. Microsoft sets prices based on factors like development expenses, market trends, and competition. Thinking that piracy alone drives up costs for paying users makes things sound more straightforward than they really are.

Piracy isn’t the same as lost sales: Not everyone using a pirated copy would have bought the software if piracy wasn’t an option. Sometimes, people choose piracy because they can’t afford to pay, so it's not fair to count all those users as "potential customers" or lost income.

The cost of piracy, copyright infringement, the theft of intellectual property and revenue - those are all passed onto paying consumers that pay for the software and content. So those paying consumers subsidize the freeloaders, thieves, and criminals.

Stop defending thiefs. Software piracy results in lost sales. Under the law, a pirate is a thief who steals the revenue that they should pay for the software or product - using it without paying for it. That is stealing for the seller/publisher/content creator.

I could care less what people can and cannot afford to pay. Even those that cannot afford to pay who pirate software are thieves. They are stealing. Poverty is not an excuse or authorization for people to steal. They should all be prosecuted as the criminals that they are.

 

[bazang]

So this is just you assumption and nothing more. You can't use your assumption as a source. Please give the source, and Microsoft analysis of lost revenue. Unfortunately, I don't have access to it as I'm not in financial department of Microsoft.

Not assumption. Statement of fact. The figures were released by Microsoft CEO Ballmer years ago.

By your logic, ad blocking is also theft. Why? You're stealing revenue from Google, their employees and their families. You're stealing from content creators as well. Then why are you using one? You're literally watching videos illegally due to blocking ads which should be watched as well.

Watching ads is optional. There are no laws that state or compel or require anybody to watch ads.

Buying software in every nation on the Earth, there are laws protecting the intellectual property and copyrights of the software publishers. The user is required to purchase a license otherwise it is piracy and theft of revenue. Lack of enforcement is no excuse for not paying your way. You might as well say "I don't know all the laws, so I don't have to follow any of them."

It is not the duty of the software publishers to be their own piracy police, but you are correct - they should be much more strict. The responsibility of enforcing copyright and intellectual property laws, as well as criminal laws, is the duty of the state. Companies pay taxes to the state for the state to protect their interests.

Please stop defending software piracy and stealing, because that is exactly what it is. You admitted here publicly that you are a software pirate and thief, and you just don't care how that harms society and others.

I bet if you worked years to create something, put that something onto the market, and then 90% of people just took it without paying, you would be mighty upset about your lost revenues due to piracy and revenue theft. "Revenue theft by not paying for something - a service, a software, a physical object" is a legal concept that exists in virtually every nation with a well-developed legal system. Although it is referred to with different terminology from nation to nation.

 

[silversurfer]

Another forum thread went too far with partially off-topic.
All of you said your opinion regarding software piracy and the difference to stealing…
Now it’s time for agree to disagree