Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

“One of his projects was to manufacture thousands of ‘restore disks,’ usually supplied by computer-makers as a way for users to restore Windows to a hard drive if it crashes or must be wiped. The disks can be used only on a computer that already has a license for the Windows operating system, and the license transfers with the computer for its full life span. But computer owners often lose or throw out the disks, and though the operating system can be downloaded free on a licensed computer, Lundgren realized that many people didn’t feel competent to do that, and were simply throwing out their computers and buying new ones.

Lundgren had 28,000 of the disks made and shipped to a broker in Florida. Their plan was to sell the disks to computer refurbishing shops for about 25 cents apiece, so the refurbishers could provide the disks to used-computer buyers and wouldn’t have to take the time to create the disks themselves.

...

Eventually, the Florida broker, Robert Wolff, called Lundgren and offered to buy the disks himself as part of a government sting, Lundgren said. Wolff sent Lundgren $3,400, and the conspiracy was cemented. Both were indicted on a charge of conspiracy to traffic in counterfeit goods and criminal copyright infringement.”

This should not result in jail time. Is Florida really so free of violent crime and other more serious offenses that this case is a priority for federal prosecutors?



Not speaking about this case specifically, but the existence of other more serious and/or violent crimes does not negate the impact of small crimes. You can't just say "yeah well there's a lot of unsolved murders so what about those?" as some sort of indictment against police officers enforcing laws.


It's one thing if they could have proven the case without this fabricated sting. Setting that up just to put the nails in the coffin of someone trying to do good seems pretty evil to me.

Why the hell didn't the prosecutors just ring up the guy and say, "Hey, Microsoft is pretty pissed about these disks. If you don't [destroy them / remove their logo] we'll have to prosecute you."

They have exactly that kind of discretion.


Lundgren intended to sell the disks to computer refurbisher shops, this is a fact of the case. In theory, they could have found a shop he intended to sell the discs to and caught him in the act. The OP was lamenting the waste of resources that went into setting up a sting, I would imagine the time involved in the above mentioned scenario would be much greater.

Lundgren wasn't setup, he wasn't coerced into doing something illegal. He was or was planning to do it and they just called him up and asked to be a customer.

This is similar to busting people for prostitution. You can either spend extraordinary time and effort in surveillance to catch them in the act. Or you can just dress in civilian clothing and approach them.


Just curious - do you think this is a reasonable, proportional punishment?


Not at all. In this case he hadn't sold anything. They should have approached him and explained why he couldn't do what he was doing. Then gave him a remediation option, like destroying the discs, and dropping the matter.

I'm also not convinced something like this didn't happened. All of his exposing about Microsoft double dipping and the whole system being designed to scam people out of money makes me suspicious of his true motivations.

Microsoft stepped forward and corrected Federal Prosecutors who initially sought $299 per violation. They stated that they sold refurbishers licenses for $25 and the discs had at most a $20 value.

Lundgren was convicted of counterfeiting and copyright violation, not piracy and is even quoted as saying if he'd labeled the discs differently this would have never happened. I'm curious if that statement was based on what he ultimately got convicted of or something else?


>Then gave him a remediation option, like destroying the discs, and dropping the matter.

This strikes me as the far more reasonable outcome that didn't happen.

>I'm curious if that statement was based on what he ultimately got convicted of or something else?

Who knows. As a practical matter, I do see a chilling effect coming out of this judgement for those reselling Windows boxes - either don't do it or make damn sure you have your legal ducks in a row.

(edit:formatting)


Incentives. If they successfully prosecute him, they look good (at least in some dimensions, since it is their job to prosecute people). I doubt that is the case, or at least not as much, if they merely dissuade him without taking any legal action.


I agree with you on that point, for sure. Prosecutors make their bones on pleas and convictions, not on solving the problem without going to court. I wish there was a way to allow prosecutors to do that without hurting their record, but I'm not sure there is.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: