Aardvark Daily

Please visit the sponsor!

Whoa, hang on a minute Microsoft!

Microsoft is an industry giant and as such, its every move attracts lots of public attention.

One of the biggest problems you face when you become such a high-profile player is that some people believe you can do no right. Everyone loves to back the underdog and success is often seen as evil by some -- usually those who can't be bothered putting in the effort to become a success themselves.

However, in Microsoft's case, much of the criticism is not without merit. Some of their allegedly dubious business practices of the past have caused concern within the ranks of even the most balanced observers and they have been the subject of anti-trust prosecutions on several occasions.

However, what they've done this week seems to make all their prior sins look like trifling misdemeanors.

It seems that Microsoft has convinced a court to seize control of web domains that it *alleges* are being used for infecting Windows computers with malware.

The domains belong to No-IP.com which is one of many companies that allow users to create subdomains which can deliver Net users to an IP number that may change from minute to minute. These so-called dynamic DNS services are often used by people who want to run a webserver or other service from their own computer when connected via an ISP that doesn't offer static IP numbers.

According to Microsoft, evil little sods have been using No-IP.com's service to effectively allow the creation of a highly dynamic malware network which doesn't rely on fixed IP numbers or even dedicated computers.

Now, while Microsoft's goal in shutting down these rogue subdomains might be worthy, the way they've gone about it seems to smack of corruption.

Why should *any* commercial organisation (which Microsoft surely is) be allowed to take control of another legally held domain -- for any reason?

Microsoft claims it was essential to stop computers running its operating system from being infected with this malware. Well don't you think that fixing your bloody software so that it was no longer vulnerable to such threats might be a more ethical way to deal with this problem of your own making?

Even if you agree that Microsoft ought to have been allowed to take such a drastic step as to steal another company's domain name, surely they must then be under an obligation to ensure that no legitimate user of this service has their service interrupted.

Sadly, that appears not to be the case. All of the No-IP.com subdomain users have found themselves affected by Microsoft's actions.

If the courts were prepared to create this precedent then I wonder how they would respond to applications that Microsoft itself be forfeit to Ubuntu - since the real problem isn't so much a few rogue subdomains but the poorly designed and implemented security model on which Windows appears to be based. Surely Ubuntu could argue that Microsoft must forfeit all its property to Ubuntu in order to save the public from this huge threat?

Okay, that last paragraph was typed with my tongue firmly in my cheek - but I think you see the point I'm trying to make. Domains are as much a "property" as a company's hardware, cars, offices, etc. To allow another company to effectively steal this asset solely to address a shortcoming in their own products is outrageous and surely must be unacceptable.

I bet that if it had been a small company who'd petitioned the courts to allow such a seizure, they'd have been booted out on their arse in no time flat. However, if you're Microsoft -- it seems that you can do any damned thing you want, regardless of the law.

It seems that the USA really does have the best judges money can buy.

Please visit the sponsor!

Have your say in the Aardvark Forums.

PERMALINK to this column

Rank This Aardvark Page

Change Font