“AutoPatcher is one of the most useful utilities for everyone, especially tech people,” said one. Another remarked: “Legal defies logic today by forcibly removing a free and trustworthy software package which makes updating Windows more convenient.”

But Microsoft was not to be swayed.

A Microsoft spokesperson told Web User: “It is Microsoft policy that the distribution of supplemental code such as hot fixes, security updates, and service packs is discouraged. This policy is in place due to concern for the safety and security of our customers, as we can only guarantee the download's contents when it comes from a Microsoft website.”

She added: “Distribution of these materials without permission is also an infringement of our copyright.”

Kaladis told Web User that after complying with the take-down notice, the developers asked for more information on the matter.

“That information never came,” he told us. Microsoft said the case has been satisfactorily settled and that its request to AutoPatcher to stop redistributing Microsoft intellectual property was met on the 29 August.

“As of that afternoon, it is our understanding that they no longer offer the Microsoft updates from their site,” said the spokeswoman.

My way or the highway

Microsoft's position is that they want users to exclusively use Microsoft Update (MU).

“We recommend that customers sign up for Microsoft Update and enable its automatic update functionality to receive all updates directly from Microsoft,” said the spokesperson.

Microsoft's attitude towards AutoPatcher is typical of big software suppliers who jealously guard their intellectual property, according to Jimmy Desai, a partner at law firm Blake Lapthorn Tarlo Lyons.

“Software providers don't like other people producing code for their software as their engineers don't know what's going on. When customers complain if something goes wrong, they like to be responsible for their own mistakes,” he said.

However, Desai said the cynical view is that Microsoft doesn't want anyone competing with it and so tries to lock up and ring fence all its products, as it is trying to protect its brand.

Whether AutoPatcher is doing something beneficial for Microsoft users is not the issue, says Desai.

“AutoPatcher may be good or bad, but that is not the point for Microsoft. It is better in principle if they issue their own fixes, as software is their key asset and they don't want other people involved,” said Desai.

Although Microsoft told Web User “we do not believe nor do we have any knowledge that AutoPatcher was a source of malicious code,” it is adamant that its way is the only way.

“We believe that the best source for security and updates is from Microsoft so that customers can be sure they are getting the actual updates and not malware,” said the spokeswoman.

Taking a new tack

All is not lost for AutoPatcher as Kaladis and his team are working on a new way of distributing AutoPatcher.

As he sees it, “the problem was the inclusion of Microsoft's administrative updates within the AutoPatcher package. Of course, AutoPatcher would no longer be distributed as before. I wrote a program which downloads our stuff from www.autopatcher.com and Microsoft's patches from Microsoft's servers and then recreates the AutoPatcher package as we did.

“If we were to 'assemble' an AutoPatcher release, then it should also be possible for this to happen on the user's machine, on the spot. This way, Microsoft 'is' the sole provider of its patches as they requested,” he said.

Kaladis says the AutoPatcher team are currently working out the details of this new way of distribution and that people who are interested can test it.

However, this solution may keep Microsoft happy. We asked the company about the early beta release. A spokeswoman said: “I'm afraid I have no further information on this subject.”

Read the first part of this article here.

More news via RSS Post item to Del.icio.us Post item to Digg.com

Back to index