JE McGimpsey wrote in:

What benefit to anyone is there in presuming illegal intent, given that
the cracks are commonly available and cheap?

OK, so the availability of Office 2003 in Warez groups means that robbing
the legitimate publisher of the software is all right?

I can't see the ready availability of cracks is justification for using
them.

Especially since the OP, in this case, presumably used his real name and
address, despite MS's warnings not to?

And how do you know he used his real name? I notice while you're defending
him you use the word "presumably" so is it possible you also have some
doubts?

IMO, it's better to freely admit that Office document protection schemes
are not secure, and direct people to the available information.

MHO differs from yours. Next next time I see some disreputable person trying
to open a new luxury car with a coat hanger should I just assume it's his car
and he has a right to it? Isn't that pretty similar to what you're saying?


--
David R. Norton MVP