Fraud?

Then please tell me which law you are breaking by making up a name when you call a tech support line.

This is MS tech support, it isn't the IRS or the FBI you are calling.

I agree with Scott on this one. What law is being broken?

By the way - for all you Linux lovers- are you aware that MS now owns the liscence rights to SUSE Linux. They have just inked a big deal with Walmart

If Microsoft had a colorable right to this information, providing false information would be fraud: "Making a false representation, known to be false, upon which the party to whom the representation is made relies to its detriment." And I'm not, in the least, interested in getting into an argument about damages or whether Microsoft would prosecute this -- it doesn't matter to me in the least.

See the definition of fraud I provided in response to Scott's post. Lay people don't get to vote on what they think the law might mean. Regardless, my point, which appears to be lost, is that "well, you can lie a little," doesn't justify the idiotic demand for personal information to re-activate the OS.

In that case perhaps you should not have said it would be fraud in the first place. Speaking in legalese does not make you right. You might also want to read MS privacy policies - they would NOT be selling your name and phone number. ( And no I dont work for them)

Of course people get to vote on what the law is. The US is a govt of precedent - but as I am not a lawyer I have no standing to argue this from your perspective it seems

Actually, isn't that the entire point of juries? I thought judicial theory was that it is within the rights of juries to interpret the law.

No, in Common Law jusridictions, juries typically deal with questions of fact, not law ...

Why? I just explained that it would be fraud.

True. The fact that I'm right makes me right.

Irrelevant.

1. What's your remedy if Microsoft violates their privacy policies? Breach of contract? Fraud (requires intent)?

2. Supposing Microsoft sells off its unit that manages this information. Is the subsequent company bound by a "policy"? Suppose Microsoft goes bankrupt (unlikely, but anything is possible)? Courts have held customer information to be an asset of the estate that can be sold without restriction.

3. What happens if a Microsoft employee illegally violates the "policy" and steals the information?

As I said, I am hypersensitive about giving out personal information to ANYONE who doesn't have valid reason for having it. At minimum, it means I receive very, very few telemarketing calls. At best, it means I've never had my identity stolen and, more to the point, I have a number of checks in place to ensure that, if it ever is, I can readily prove the fact of the theft. You may see providing this information as a small thing. I don't.

I don't think you are right. But hey, I'm not a lawyer. :)

I thought Scalia even once said that while trial by jury "has never been efficient… it has always been free." (Apprendi v. New Jersey). I tend to think that jury nullification has a place in our society.

No. The point of juries is to make a finding of fact. They never make a finding of law -- the judge provides express instructions to them that define exactly what is the law. The technical term for a jury is, "trier of fact." Only the judge determines how the law is construed (though, of course, the judge can also be the trier of fact if it's a bench trial).

Although that was true when jury nullification was quite common (19th century)...

Actually - I am now laughing so hard I could cry.

Ptravel did not want to provide his name to MS.

But to quote someone else

"google is your friend"

For someone who is so concerned about privacy - it helps to not give so much identifying information about yourself on a place like FT

I am, and he is (right, that is).

Scalia is a psychopath, albeit a brilliant one. Jury nullification is an absolute evil and, unfortunately, it's proponents don't recognize why. BTW, I'd be happy to discuss the myth of jury nullification, but it really doesn't belong in this thread.