Talk:FCKGW

Should this page exist

I'd argue that this page shouldn't exist. First of all, it's unclear whether it's talking about a large group of product keys ("The five letters FCKGW are the first five characters of most product keys...") or a single one ("This particular key has been banned..."). Then it spends two paragraphs discussing the pros and cons of whether illegal uses should be allowed to install service packs - an issue already covered in Windows XP (though the extra information here could be added to there). Something about dedicating an article to a specific product key, instead of to the issues around it, doesn't sit quite right with me. Perhaps the article should be renamed to "Issues with installing XP patches on a pirated copy" or something? - Brian Kendig 20:58, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The serial has its own history, actually it's kind of a legend on the web now, similar to that Office XP VLK key starting with FM9FY... I'd be interested into where it actually leaked from. MSDN? Maybe even Microsoft itself? Or any company? --84.160.250.83 20:56, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I vaguely remember this being a Volume License key released to some of Microsoft's more active and "trustworthy" (eg, not leaking builds of Whistler or being caught doing so) beta testers. I can't be certain weather my memory is correct on that, but I am sure that the individual that released the key along with an ISO of Windows XP Professional VLK (very soon was reduced to a pack of "corpfiles", the six different files from the regular Professional CD) was called by the nickname of devils0wn. --216.186.51.2 15:23, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There's a rumor that it was leaked by IBM.

It seems to me the letters FCKGW might actually stand for FuCK Gates William. lol

Possibly. The key might have been chosen from a list of generated keys. Shawnc 06:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

The letters obviously don't mean anything. If they were able to pick their own letters, they not only would've made a less cryptic insult, but also a more memorizable key. It's obviously just a generated key that they selected.

On enabling piracy and alternate meanings

I don't believe that it's appropriate to remove valuable information from an article on the dubious grounds that that information may aid illegal activity. Additionally, the product key in question can't be used to install current versions of Windows XP, and if you installed the first version of XP with that product key, you would be unable to obtain any security updates or other support from Microsoft. This makes the key in question pretty worthless.

I also removed mention of other supposed meanings of FCKGW. We know for certain that the key is randomly generated, so there can't be any hidden meaning to the letters FCKGW. Alereon June 30, 2005 13:06 (UTC)

I could randomly generate an infinite amount of strings until I get the entire message you posted, then choose that one.

It's not -that- random. You can't just choose a certain order of letters and have a valid key.

Thats actually whats done in a lot of scene releases that include a keygen and a few keys -- Groups will often look for keys that are easy to remember (which "FCKGW" qualifies as, due to being so close to fuck). Or they'll go for a key that starts with their tag. IMO, alternative meanings (or at least a description like this) should go in the article, but I don't feel strongly enough to put it there or start an edit war.

--Semi 23:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

If you can find a source for that (even the general statement about what groups do), I think it's really interesting and should be included. --Galaxiaad 00:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Archived vfd discussion

This article was recently nominated for deletion. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/FCKGW for the archived discussion. -- Francs2000 | Talk 00:23, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

This image should be added for refference

Image Legality?

Should the image be changed to something that does not contain the full key for Windows XP?

As said above, it's kinda useless for any copy of Windows XP except one of the very first corporate ones.

Wikipedia is not censored, except when it is. Haakon 15:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Image Legality?

It doesn't contain the full key, if you look, the last 3/5 are blocked out. It's of absolutely no use now anyway, but it's a cool picture.

Why would it be illegal to show the full key? What laws says that registration keys are "secret"; are that not just terms of the EULA? Since visiting wikipedia does not require accepting microsoft EULA it should be ok to show the key in full text on wikipedia. Right?

Image talk:WinXP.Launch.FCKGW.jpg

Windows XP - Cracked before launch data. CD-KEY Obscured for obvious reasons. Owner: If you know who took this picture contact piracy@microsoft.com

There is nothing ilegal/infringing about this image. The CD key is obscured.

Due to the nature of the image the owner is unlikley to come forward.

• unlikely to come forward means copyright is unattainable - which means it can never be appropriate on Wikipedia. That does not put the picture in the public domain. SchmuckyTheCat 20:22, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

The original author was never known, this image was distributed anonymously by the author - indicating his wish to place this in the public domain without copyright restrictions. dila 20:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

• exactly, that doesn't mean there is no copyright, it means permission to redistribute is unattainable by Wikipedia. this image has been placed on Wikipedia many times in many formats, obscured and not. it simply can't exist here based on the Wikimedia Foundations legal policies. SchmuckyTheCat 20:26, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Eh? Look at the licensing at Image:Wanted_for_treason.jpg. The uploader here claimed that since it was published without a copyright notice, it falls into the public domain. If so, then this image should also be allowed. Hbdragon88 20:20, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Yuck, that is absolutely false. OLD copyright law, like that one, depended on notice. In modern law, existance of copyright doesn't depend on notice. SchmuckyTheCat 23:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

• • I think this is absolute garbage. It's perfectly clear to any reasonable person that the image was not meant to be copyrighted. With the full key obscured (even though it's useless today), the image does no harm and belongs with this entry. The photo is synonymous with the subject of the article. You are being unnecessarily nitpicky here. Jacono 19:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Desirable even to legal owners

added note that even legal owners use this version in preference to an activation version to avoid the pitfalls of XP disabling their PC when a hardware change is made.

This made the key desirable for unauthorized users of Windows XP, as well as legal owners who wished to prevent the activation code from rendering their PC unusable upon a hardware change.

ps, how can the image and the serial # be censored? quelle incroyable levels of anality

Great Page

I've been laughing for a while now, that someone actually made a page about that key. I had it memorized for years :-p Stonesour025 01:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)