WinInfo Daily News   |   Windows IT Pro
in

SuperSite Blog

Rafael is Vindicated: Microsoft Did Steal Open Source Code for USB/DVD Tool

Microsoft just confirmed to me that it has completed an investigation of allegations made by my Windows 7 Secrets co-author, Rafael Rivera, concerning the unauthorized and illegal use of open source code in its Windows 7 USB/DVD Download Tool. The software giant has found that it did, indeed, use the code in question. Here's their official statement about this issue:

As you've likely read, we've been investigating a report that the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download Tool might contain GPLv2 code.  The WUDT is a free tool which was offered by the Microsoft Store that enabled customers to create bootable USB drives or DVD backup media from the electronic software (ESD) edition of Windows 7 that comes in an ISO format.

After looking at the code in question, we are now able to confirm this was indeed the case, although it was not intentional on our part. While we had contracted with a third party to create the tool, we share responsibility as we did not catch it as part of our code review process. We have furthermore conducted a review of other code provided through the Microsoft Store and this was the only incident of this sort we could find.

When it comes to our attention that a Microsoft component contains third party code, our aim is to be respectful of the terms under which that code is being shared. As a result, we will be making the source code as well as binaries for this tool available next week under the terms of the General Public License v2 as described here, and are also taking measures to apply what we have learned from this experience for future code reviews we perform.

Bravo, both to Microsoft for owning up to this and to Rafael for doing what he does. It astonished both Rafael and I over the past week that so many weirdos came out of the woodwork to misrepresent his claim and complain that, somehow, one example of source code theft wasn't enough. One instance of theft is still theft, people. Now that Microsoft has admitted to what it did, I hope the rest of the doubters see the light as well.

Comments

 

Keleko said:

Kudos to MS for doing the right thing - twice!  They admitted the wrong and are releasing the source as they should under the GPL.

November 13, 2009 3:35 PM
 

Bink.nu said:

Microsoft just confirmed to me that it has completed an investigation of allegations made by my Windows

November 13, 2009 3:43 PM
 

uberVU - social comments said:

This post was mentioned on Twitter by EverythingMS: Rafael is Vindicated: Microsoft Did Steal Open Source Code for USB/DVD Tool http://bit.ly/7CxqF

November 13, 2009 4:19 PM
 

redunion1940 said:

OT: About COD: MW2, I being a PC gamer have no feeling to buy a game that has a single player campeign of less then 5 hours, and console like multiplayer.Plus it is $10 more than it should be.

November 13, 2009 5:01 PM
 

beaker said:

Wait a minute.. Kudos to Microsoft? Shouldn't they be SMART enough to not do this in the first place?

WTH? Oh, ok... admit the crime afterwards and then everything is OK...

someone tell O.J....

November 13, 2009 5:44 PM
 

beaker said:

oh... and before anyone says that I'm extreme.. a crime is a crime.. WTF

November 13, 2009 5:45 PM
 

beaker said:

.. and yes.. I'm a MCSE 2003 and I buy all of Paul's and Rafael's books..

November 13, 2009 5:46 PM
 

DRWAM said:

If it's Open Source, then isn't it free anyway? ;)

Sometimes the officials should use the 'no blood, no foul" rule.

Something else to consider is that when a write a lot of stuff, and add some things in top 'test', you can easily forget all the stuff that you've added, hence accidentally keeping in the open source code. It could easily happen.

November 13, 2009 6:33 PM
 

DRWAM said:

That was add some things in 'to' test, not 'top' test.

November 13, 2009 6:43 PM
 

Rafael is Vindicated: Microsoft Did Steal Open Source Code for USB/DVD Tool | Windows Seven 7 said:

Pingback from  Rafael is Vindicated: Microsoft Did Steal Open Source Code for USB/DVD Tool | Windows Seven 7

November 13, 2009 7:45 PM
 

robertsjoe said:

Don't take away from the fact that Microsoft are thieves. Not just this time, but many, many times over the years. They are, and always have been, Evil.

November 13, 2009 7:50 PM
 

de Silentio said:

"WTH? Oh, ok... admit the crime afterwards and then everything is OK... "

You're right, violating a user agreement is wrong.  At least they admitted to their mistake.

November 13, 2009 9:09 PM
 

de Silentio said:

Microsoft had no choice but to admit to it.  The question is whether or not someone in Microsoft actually knew about the license violation.

November 13, 2009 9:11 PM
 

de Silentio said:

"someone tell O.J...."

Comparing Microsoft's license violation with OJ is like Comparing your license violations with Microsoft's license violations.

(alleged, that is)

November 13, 2009 9:18 PM
 

de Silentio said:

"Don't take away from the fact that Microsoft are [sic] thieves"

Does anyone remember the "lotsa sic hammer"?  Waethorn?

November 13, 2009 9:20 PM
 

Evox said:

I'm baffled at how this could possibly constitute theft... It's a FREE product! It's posted for others to use! Yes, there was a failure to properly follow the guidelines of the GPLv2 license... but in no way is this theft.

November 13, 2009 9:41 PM
 

roteague said:

Come off it Paul. This is not theft. I'm a programmer, it's common practice to use other people's code, especially when it's published on sites like CodePlex. Where Microsoft erred, was in not making sure the contractor that developed the program didn't put it in the position, it found itself in.

November 13, 2009 9:49 PM
 

panache1023 said:

Good for them for doing the right thing.

Mistakes, and ***, happen.

It's what you do after the mistake that someone, or something, should be judged by.

In this case, MS made a mistake, and are now going to abide by the license they accidentally violated.

Good for them.

November 13, 2009 10:35 PM
 

gfryesc1 said:

hey paul, listened to windows weekly.  sorry you don't like rupert murdoch but seriously by saying pretty please for him to remove his content from Google results, letting your own political bias shine through is way outta line.  you have a long way to go before going pro.  being politically neutral, especially in technology, is key.  

November 13, 2009 11:22 PM
 

g6672D said:

This outcome is good. Good for you Microsoft. And that was before I noticed they were also releasing the full source.

November 14, 2009 12:00 AM
 

redunion1940 said:

This also might mean a code reviewer just got a sharp reprimand, as I am sure Microsoft would have preferred to have kept that code secret, even if it doesn't affect much.

November 14, 2009 2:06 AM
 

sttevo said:

Beaker I think you are being a little harsh.  What would you suggest the punishment for such a "crime" would be anyway?

I think Microsoft are doing the right thing here.  Admitting the problem, and fixing it.  That's all you can in do a situation like this.

November 14, 2009 4:16 AM
 

gadfly10 said:

Microsoft has been stealing code for years. They're unimaginative marketeers who chiefly sell profiteering junk. Dig deep and you'll find out the REAL reason they gave Apple $150 mil (hint: Quicktime).

November 14, 2009 8:32 AM
 

roteague said:

"gadfly10 said:

Microsoft has been stealing code for years. They're unimaginative marketeers who chiefly sell profiteering junk. Dig deep and you'll find out the REAL reason they gave Apple $150 mil (hint: Quicktime)."

I'm continually amazed how often you make idiotic statements, based upon no knowledge of the facts. If you knew anything about the software development world, you would realize that Microsoft provides thousands of code snippets, that others use in their products (without requiring any license), you would also realize they started sites like CodePlex to be a home for open-source code.

Of course, there is that isn't surprising, since your only rationale seems to be to slam Microsoft, in which case, the facts don't really matter.

November 14, 2009 9:59 AM
 

gadfly10 said:

@roteague

I guess I'm equally amazed at how willfully ignorant apologists like yourself choose to be whenever you're reminded of Microsoft's true colors. Did you even look into the connection between Quicktime and Microsoft's $150 to Apple?

And CodePlex? ...Really? -- You mean Microsoft's facade for open source, run by an unbalanced board and regulated by typical MS-confusing licensing structures.

**Rolls eyes**

November 14, 2009 11:57 AM
 

Waethorn said:

"If it's Open Source, then isn't it free anyway? ;)

Sometimes the officials should use the 'no blood, no foul" rule."

Is there any law that states that you can steal something that is free?

It isn't called theft.  It's called breach of license (or "contract" in lawyer-speak).  The only thing they are guilty of is not releasing the source code under the terms of GPLv2.  Now if the source code was covered under the Apache or BSD licenses, no such terms would be required.  

I wonder how a proprietary product can be checked for breach of license of the GPL if it were released fraudulently under one of the other licenses and the source code was closed....

November 14, 2009 12:33 PM
 

Waethorn said:

Just FYI:

I still have the old software installed because I find it handy for dumping ISO's to Stick.  Does that mean I can be litigated because of breach of contract?

According to Stallman, the FSF doesn't like litigation.  I wouldn't put it beneath them though, and I still feel better that Microsoft protects customers against litigation for use of their products - something that the FSF doesn't do.

November 14, 2009 12:41 PM
 

DRWAM said:

Personally, I cannot condemn MS if this was an honest mistake. I create the call schedule for my group. Sometimes I may have 4 different copies and forget the composition of some of it. This could easily be an accident, one the MS  confessed and promised to make good.

November 14, 2009 2:33 PM
 

links for 2009-11-14 | Acerv.us said:

Pingback from  links for 2009-11-14 | Acerv.us

November 14, 2009 3:03 PM
 

redunion1940 said:

OT: Again, regarding your OEM article, so what you are saying is if I make a computer, then lets say I buy the disc, have someone else install it, and pay them $1 to do it I would have avoided the nasty EULA, so once again it doesn't matter I'll buy OEM because it is cheaper than Retail because it doesn't include x32 and x64 disc, and it has a non transferable license which I am okay with.

November 14, 2009 3:15 PM
 

redunion1940 said:

OT: On the OEM thing, I guess the EULA doesn't really matter I just popped over to newegg, and no one is complaining other than the normal OS haters this goes for all OS's, and the traditionlist who like really old interfaces like Win 95 interfaces. So this doesn't really effect "system builders"

November 14, 2009 3:20 PM
 

whiplash55 said:

Much ado about very little, the real losers here are people who don't have an external drive to install 7 on their netbook or one of the many new thin and light PC's out there without a DVD drive.

Sure it can still be done by anyone technically savvy, but using a USB for install media is a great idea.

November 14, 2009 3:25 PM
 

Microsoft publicar?? el c??digo de la herramienta que violaba licencia GPL : Blogografia said:

Pingback from  Microsoft publicar?? el c??digo de la herramienta que violaba licencia GPL : Blogografia

November 14, 2009 7:41 PM
 

Microsoft publicar?? el c??digo de la herramienta que violaba licencia GPL « WINUXBLOG said:

Pingback from  Microsoft publicar?? el c??digo de la herramienta que violaba licencia GPL «  WINUXBLOG

November 15, 2009 5:10 AM
 

Rafael is Vindicated: Microsoft Did Steal Open Source Code for USB … Software Rss said:

Pingback from  Rafael is Vindicated: Microsoft Did Steal Open Source Code for USB … Software Rss

November 15, 2009 9:39 AM
 

Sunday Wrap-Up « Countenance Blog said:

Pingback from  Sunday Wrap-Up «  Countenance Blog

November 15, 2009 9:50 AM
 

Rafael is Vindicated: Microsoft Did Steal Open Source Code for USB … | Open Hacking said:

Pingback from  Rafael is Vindicated: Microsoft Did Steal Open Source Code for USB … | Open Hacking

November 15, 2009 10:10 AM
 

Microsoft publicar?? el c??digo de la herramienta que violaba licencia GPL | Tecnica 9 Lan??s said:

Pingback from  Microsoft publicar?? el c??digo de la herramienta que violaba licencia GPL | Tecnica 9 Lan??s

November 15, 2009 6:51 PM
 

The Weekly Spin » Blog Archive » The Weekly Spin 48- November 15, 2009 said:

Pingback from  The Weekly Spin  » Blog Archive   » The Weekly Spin 48- November 15, 2009

November 15, 2009 8:36 PM
 

UR-VE.COM » Blog Archive » Microsoft publicar?? el c??digo de la herramienta que violaba licencia GPL said:

Pingback from  UR-VE.COM  » Blog Archive   » Microsoft publicar?? el c??digo de la herramienta que violaba licencia GPL

November 16, 2009 4:36 AM
Acceptable Use Policy

About pthurrott

Paul Thurrott is the guy behind the SuperSite for Windows. Way behind. :)
SPONSORED LINKS FEATURED LINKS

Calculate your savings nowSee how SAN is 57% cheaper than DAS over three years Free CDs Offer Fundamental Content for IT ProsAre you up to speed on the latest technologies and solutions? Don't miss out on your chance to get up to speed quickly on fundamental, in-depth information on some of the hottest topics in our library of content. Let Your Users Reset Their Own Passwords: Free Download Try a 30 day free trial of Desktop Authority Password Self-Service – it provides an easy-to-use, robust system for allowing users to reset their own forgotten passwords or locked accounts. Exchange Server 2010: Deploying Unified Communications - Virtual conferenceDecember 1, 2009 - Free Registration. Build your Unified Communications future on a strong Exchange Server 2010 foundation. Get Windows IT Pro & Mark Minasi’s Favorite Power Tools GuideOrder Windows IT Pro now and get "More of Mark Minasi's Favorite Power Tools"--a in-depth guide to the most useful Windows commands --FREE with your paid order! Subscribe today, and save 58% off the cover price! Migration, Virtualization, Availability, and Desktop ManagementRealize the importance of a workload optimization strategy...it can affect your bottom line! Deep Dive into VMware vSphere, eLearning SeriesJoin John Savill to explore the major functionality capabilities of the vSphere virtualization platform, including identification of the changes from ESX 3.5.
Windows IT Pro |  Subscribe |  Register |  FAQ for Windows |  Media Kit |  WinInfo News |  Europe Edition |  About Us |  Contact Us/Customer Service |  Affiliates/Licensing
SQL Server Magazine |  Office & SharePoint Pro |  WinDevPro |  asp.netPRO |  IT Library |  Technology Resource Directory |  ITTV |  IT Job Hound

© 2009 Penton Media, Inc.     Terms of Use | Privacy Statement | Reprints and Licensing