Microsoft permission to redistribute windows updates a la AutoPatc

If you are an officer of Microsoft or if you legally represent Microsoft then
please mention that in your response as I will heed your advice above that of
other responses. (e.g. although you may be an MVP or even a Microsoft
employee you are probably not authorized to represent Microsoft in this
matter)

On the other hand, if you have FIRST HAND knowledge of a legal precedent
then that may be of some help to my cause. (e.g. if you manage a PC magazine
that has redistributed or has asked to redistribute Microsoft Service Packs
or Windows updates in the past then your experience may be relevant here.)

As you know (from www.autopatcher.com) AutoPatcher packages most windows
update files that post-date the latest Service Pack. The few exceptions seem
to be well thought through: e.g. the ~250MB Service Packs are not repackaged
and nor are hardware (driver) updates. This is a profoundly useful tool to
those of us who frequently reinstall windows. AutoPatcher is a project that
has been visible to Microsoft since 2003 and I read at their forum that even
in the wake of the increased ubiquity of WGA authentication measures,
AutoPatcher has not attracted negative comment or warning from Microsoft.
(May that continue to be the case!)

I asked my ISP to host the AutoPatcher files but ran into an obstacle - they
claim that in the past couple of years they have asked Microsoft for
permission to host windows update files and have been denied. The only files
my ISP has been given permission to host are the .Net Framework
redistributable files (versions 1.1, 2.0 and 3.0)

Now it is quite possible that I am being told only half the story or that my
ISP has asked the wrong question of the wrong person at Microsoft.

***
Is an officer of Microsoft able to state with authority what Microsoft's
position is with regard to the redistribution of Windows Update files and
specifically
1. in the way that updates are packaged by the AutoPatcher project
2. the hosting of windows Service Packs by an ISP
***

I'd like to refer to your response in order to persuade my Australian ISP
(BigPond) to host the AutoPatcher files on their fileserver.

I suspect that others may find themselves in a similar position with an ISP
or perhaps a website hosting service so if you could state the position in as
general terms as possible that would best serve the widest readership.

Thank you for considering this request.

Please avoid posting layman opinion, interpretation or hearsay. Popular
opinion will not help me persuade my ISP. Although it might make entertaining
reading I respectfully ask that you do that under a separate thread.

If you want to contact an officer or someone who legally represents
Microsoft, then you need to contact Microsoft.

"najevi" <najevi AT hotmail DOT com> wrote in message
news:98FFFEC4-0C95-47EB-BC1F-...
| If you are an officer of Microsoft or if you legally represent Microsoft
then
| please mention that in your response as I will heed your advice above that
of
| other responses. (e.g. although you may be an MVP or even a Microsoft
| employee you are probably not authorized to represent Microsoft in this
| matter)
|
| On the other hand, if you have FIRST HAND knowledge of a legal precedent
| then that may be of some help to my cause. (e.g. if you manage a PC
magazine
| that has redistributed or has asked to redistribute Microsoft Service
Packs
| or Windows updates in the past then your experience may be relevant here.)
|
| As you know (from www.autopatcher.com) AutoPatcher packages most windows
| update files that post-date the latest Service Pack. The few exceptions
seem
| to be well thought through: e.g. the ~250MB Service Packs are not
repackaged
| and nor are hardware (driver) updates. This is a profoundly useful tool
to
| those of us who frequently reinstall windows. AutoPatcher is a project
that
| has been visible to Microsoft since 2003 and I read at their forum that
even
| in the wake of the increased ubiquity of WGA authentication measures,
| AutoPatcher has not attracted negative comment or warning from Microsoft.
| (May that continue to be the case!)
|
| I asked my ISP to host the AutoPatcher files but ran into an obstacle -
they
| claim that in the past couple of years they have asked Microsoft for
| permission to host windows update files and have been denied. The only
files
| my ISP has been given permission to host are the .Net Framework
| redistributable files (versions 1.1, 2.0 and 3.0)
|
| Now it is quite possible that I am being told only half the story or that
my
| ISP has asked the wrong question of the wrong person at Microsoft.
|
| ***
| Is an officer of Microsoft able to state with authority what Microsoft's
| position is with regard to the redistribution of Windows Update files and
| specifically
| 1. in the way that updates are packaged by the AutoPatcher project
| 2. the hosting of windows Service Packs by an ISP
| ***
|
| I'd like to refer to your response in order to persuade my Australian ISP
| (BigPond) to host the AutoPatcher files on their fileserver.
|
| I suspect that others may find themselves in a similar position with an
ISP
| or perhaps a website hosting service so if you could state the position in
as
| general terms as possible that would best serve the widest readership.
|
| Thank you for considering this request.
|
| Please avoid posting layman opinion, interpretation or hearsay. Popular
| opinion will not help me persuade my ISP. Although it might make
entertaining
| reading I respectfully ask that you do that under a separate thread.
|
|

"Tom Willett" wrote:

> If you want to contact an officer or someone who legally represents
> Microsoft, then you need to contact Microsoft.
>

Would you care to recommend a contact person
.... or title,
.... or department,
.... or even an email address?

I have tried, and the only acknowledged contact I have managed so far is a
phone call to the main switchboard at Microsoft Australia. My enquiry 'has
been escalated' to an unnamed party within the licensing department.

I remain hopeful for a positive response.