VOD - Abusing Trust System

[arallmuus]

Are you really crying a sob story for Microsoft? REALLY? If you think Microsoft gives two shits about you or Bitcoin, beyond profit motive, you are sorely mistaken.

Yeah, I guess I'm "crying a sob story for MS"....  maybe, because I want them to keep using Bitcoin and to integrate it globally.

Almost every company integrates Bitcoin for profits only and that's okay - that's the purpose of Bitcoin.

Just because someone is selling msdn key for bitcoin doesnt means that bitcoin will be rejected by microsoft, do you think that if someone sells it for USD, then microsoft will be rejecting USD?

[1714826452]

1714826452

[1714826452]

1714826452

[1714826452]

1714826452

[ndnh]

I don't think that is legal. (Not saying it is illegal)

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

Technically, Vod has the right to put it as long as he believes that such a trade might result in a scam.
Otherwise, you will only consider it a scam only when the scam is done over with? It is a warning, lol. I don't think you will get it removed, IMO.



Edit: The trust feedback was probably given not because of MS Terms, it was given because there are quite good chances that all the keys may be revoked.

[Muhammed Zakir]

I don't think that is legal. (Not saying it is illegal)

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

Technically, Vod has the right to put it as long as he believes that such a trade might result in a scam.
Otherwise, you will only consider it a scam once the scam is done and people lost money? It is a warning lol. I don't think you will get it removed, IMO.

It will if he can follow https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=887515.0.

I'll stop selling keys immediately, but everyone should do that

Excellent.  Contact me after one month and I will remove the negative feedback. 

[ndnh]

I don't think that is legal. (Not saying it is illegal)

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

Technically, Vod has the right to put it as long as he believes that such a trade might result in a scam.
Otherwise, you will only consider it a scam once the scam is done and people lost money? It is a warning lol. I don't think you will get it removed, IMO.

It will if he can follow https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=887515.0.

I'll stop selling keys immediately, but everyone should do that

Excellent.  Contact me after one month and I will remove the negative feedback.  

Yeah, of course, he will get a chance. What I meant is he may nor get it removed if he is to continue the trade. I was assuming that part, .

[chmod755]

Just because someone is selling msdn key for bitcoin doesnt means that bitcoin will be rejected by microsoft, do you think that if someone sells it for USD, then microsoft will be rejecting USD?

Bitcoin is tiny - and digital currency - not legal tender, if they are seeing a community working against them (it's not like OP is the only one selling keys) they could stop it. If someone sells it for USD the government behind the USD will force them to stop doing it.

[abyrnes81]

Just because someone is selling msdn key for bitcoin doesnt means that bitcoin will be rejected by microsoft, do you think that if someone sells it for USD, then microsoft will be rejecting USD?

Bitcoin is tiny - and digital currency - not legal tender, if they are seeing a community working against them (it's not like OP is the only one selling keys) they could stop it.

They can never stop it, come on are you serious? Maybe you wanted to say the will never start to accept it but microsoft is not stupid. Bitcoin is not illegal and it will never be illegal.

[Lauda]

Yes, we are doing this again. How many times will his "service" to the community be used as an excuse for his abusive behavior? Amazing how this is never a problem for Tomatocage but with VOD it is a recurring theme. He is in fact abusing his position on the default trust. He is lying claiming selling the keys is illegal, it is not. At worst it is a violation of the terms of service, NOT a criminal act. VOD simply evoked the issue of criminality in the hopes that the staff would do his extortion work for him and simply ban all the sellers for "illegal" activity.

Are there angry customers lined up complaining? No.
Is it a crime to sell them? No.

So who made VOD the moral arbiter Bitcointalk precrime sheriff?

If it is not against the forum rules, and there are no victims, what exactly is his justification for leaving negative trust ratings for any key seller he can find? Because someone could possibly maybe potentially lose their validation in the distant future? I think people paying a fraction of the retail price for these keys realize the reason the price is reduced is the increased risk of potential deactivation, and are perfectly willing to transact anyway. VOD is on the default trust list, and people on the default trust list DO IN FACT have their trust ratings moderated. As some one on the default trust, he has extra power to destroy people's reputations, and along with that comes more stringent standards for his own use of the trust system.

I do not however understand the drama here. You do realize that I could put negative trust on you, because of this post? With that I'm saying that I don't trust you, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Ironically only people who got negative trust rating complain. I'm not taking a side here, don't get me wrong. But judging from what was written (and I don't know if that's how it goes with msdn keys) he has a point at the first glance. If it is true what he says, then selling there keys is wrong and he's right to give him negative trust.

You think. You do not know, that's the problem. I've been offered stolen keys in the past at similar rates, that's the thing. To judge VOD we'd have to go on a per case basis, which would take forever. Anyhow you're pointing this out often, with a few others that come and go. If the admins see that something is wrong, they will take action. If they don't, there isn't really much you can do about it.

[dogie]

he has the right to leave negative feedback if he sees it fit

He does, but remember he is also accountable for his actions for being in default trust.

[TECSHARE]

Yes, we are doing this again. How many times will his "service" to the community be used as an excuse for his abusive behavior? Amazing how this is never a problem for Tomatocage but with VOD it is a recurring theme. He is in fact abusing his position on the default trust. He is lying claiming selling the keys is illegal, it is not. At worst it is a violation of the terms of service, NOT a criminal act. VOD simply evoked the issue of criminality in the hopes that the staff would do his extortion work for him and simply ban all the sellers for "illegal" activity.

Are there angry customers lined up complaining? No.
Is it a crime to sell them? No.

So who made VOD the moral arbiter Bitcointalk precrime sheriff?

If it is not against the forum rules, and there are no victims, what exactly is his justification for leaving negative trust ratings for any key seller he can find? Because someone could possibly maybe potentially lose their validation in the distant future? I think people paying a fraction of the retail price for these keys realize the reason the price is reduced is the increased risk of potential deactivation, and are perfectly willing to transact anyway. VOD is on the default trust list, and people on the default trust list DO IN FACT have their trust ratings moderated. As some one on the default trust, he has extra power to destroy people's reputations, and along with that comes more stringent standards for his own use of the trust system.

I do not however understand the drama here. You do realize that I could put negative trust on you, because of this post? With that I'm saying that I don't trust you, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Ironically only people who got negative trust rating complain. I'm not taking a side here, don't get me wrong. But judging from what was written (and I don't know if that's how it goes with msdn keys) he has a point at the first glance. If it is true what he says, then selling there keys is wrong and he's right to give him negative trust.

You think. You do not know, that's the problem. I've been offered stolen keys in the past at similar rates, that's the thing. To judge VOD we'd have to go on a per case basis, which would take forever. Anyhow you're pointing this out often, with a few others that come and go. If the admins see that something is wrong, they will take action. If they don't, there isn't really much you can do about it.

Is that a threat now? Very classy. "I don't understand the drama here!" (proceeds to make threats and create more drama).

I am glad to know you feel it is appropriate to abuse the trust system to harm some ones reputation because you don't like what they said. You would be saying you do not trust me, but it would still clearly be petty, retaliatory, and abusive considering we have never transacted. Tell me again how making the observation that people still want these keys makes me untrustworthy? Of course if you see the trust system as a tool of retribution, using it for punishing people who speak words you don't agree with is ok, that doesn't matter then does it?

This is just another demonstration of how no one has any respect for the trust system any more and simply uses it like a petty system of retribution for disagreeing with them in public. Feel free to join those childish ranks if you so desire. I am sure there will be lots of discussion in a place where everyone is punished for not agreeing with each other. God forbid we examine each case on a case by case basis! That might be too close to some form of justice! We can't have that now.

[shorena]

-snip-
I spoke about Italy since I'm based there; however, the Italian law is based on European Directives so i don't think other EU allow such a trade - so, we can safely say such practices are also illegal

Id like to see the EU law or directive that make this illegal. Since I am a EU citizen my country (germany) should have a similar law. Yet I know its different with other digital goods, such as steam games. Reselling a steam game is violating their ToS, but it is within my right to do so. I think I would know if this had changed. Besides that, many other accounts or digital items sold here would be illegal under this assumption. This would include and is not limited to everything tradable via steam, e.g. CS:GO skins[1]. A companies rules are just that and any rule a company tries to enforce that is violating laws can be ignored. I have yet to see evidence that reselling MS keys is illegal anywhere. Yes, those keys might get revoked, but as others have already pointed out thats part of the risk to buy these and there has been no reported incident where this happend. AFAIK Microsoft has given up on this fight in the 90's. They are probably happy for the market share these cheap keys give them. Their plans and announcements for Windows 10 indicate this as well. Win10 will most likely be free for home and basic use.

in other European Union countries as well (total population is roughly 507 million people). As per forum rules, as stated by sirius, here: 1. Trading of goods that are illegal in the seller's or buyer's country is forbidden; so, since such deals are illegal there IF any buyer or seller involved are based there such a trade is not allowed in Marketplace board.

HE COULD DO NOTHING AGAINST RULES IF HE WOULD BE BASED IN FANTASYLAND SINCE NO ONE WOULD CARE ABOUT SUCH COUNTRY MAKING A FUSS OVER IT. EUROPEAN UNION IS NOT SO AVAILABLE TO PASS OVER IT...ALSO BECAUSE OF THE TTIP DEAL (LOOK AT ENFORCEMENT PART HERE) THAT SEEMS TO BE BOUND TO INCLUDE ARMONIZATION OF IP LAWS AND RECOGNITION OF COURTS SENTENCES.

Peace & Love

Leaked EU analysis of TTIP IPR negotiations

Nothing you linked is law, TTIP is in the state of secret negotiations and nothing regarding it is currently relevant for anyone. It might get very hairy in the future, but it is not yet time to quote that.

I don't think that is legal. (Not saying it is illegal)

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

Technically, Vod has the right to put it as long as he believes that such a trade might result in a scam.
Otherwise, you will only consider it a scam only when the scam is done over with? It is a warning, lol. I don't think you will get it removed, IMO.

Technically, Vod is on the DefaultTrust list and some of those selling the keys do so for over a year without incident. There is no reason to mark them all as scammers now. I cant see one at least.

[1] see last reply by community mod http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/1/619568793896191005/

[Lauda]

Is that a threat now? Very classy. "I don't understand the drama here!" (proceeds to make threats and create more drama).

I am glad to know you feel it is appropriate to abuse the trust system to harm some ones reputation because you don't like what they said. You would be saying you do not trust me, but it would still clearly be petty, retaliatory, and abusive considering we have never transacted. Tell me again how making the observation that people still want these keys makes me untrustworthy? Of course if you see the trust system as a tool of retribution, using it for punishing people who speak words you don't agree with is ok, that doesn't matter then does it?

This is just another demonstration of how no one has any respect for the trust system any more and simply uses it like a petty system of retribution for disagreeing with them in public. Feel free to join those childish ranks if you so desire. I am sure there will be lots of discussion in a place where everyone is punished for not agreeing with each other. God forbid we examine each case on a case by case basis! That might be too close to some form of justice! We can't have that now.

You're very wrong. This is not a threat. I was making an example. I have nothing against you or any forum member currently. I don't think that I've actually ever left someone negative trust. Even if I had, I've removed it. You don't have to take things the wrong way.

He does, but remember he is also accountable for his actions for being in default trust.

That is true indeed. That's where the lack of moderation comes in. The admins have decided who to put on the default trust list.

[Grand_Voyageur]

-snip-
I spoke about Italy since I'm based there; however, the Italian law is based on European Directives so i don't think other EU allow such a trade - so, we can safely say such practices are also illegal

Id like to see the EU law or directive that make this illegal. Since I am a EU citizen my country (germany) should have a similar law. Yet I know its different with other digital goods, such as steam games. Reselling a steam game is violating their ToS, but it is within my right to do so. I think I would know if this had changed. Besides that, many other accounts or digital items sold here would be illegal under this assumption. This would include and is not limited to everything tradable via steam, e.g. CS:GO skins[1]. A companies rules are just that and any rule a company tries to enforce that is violating laws can be ignored. I have yet to see evidence that reselling MS keys is illegal anywhere. Yes, those keys might get revoked, but as others have already pointed out thats part of the risk to buy these and there has been no reported incident where this happend. AFAIK Microsoft has given up on this fight in the 90's. They are probably happy for the market share these cheap keys give them. Their plans and announcements for Windows 10 indicate this as well. Win10 will most likely be free for home and basic use.

Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the legal protection of computer programs. You should look for the German law that translated the said directive in national law to check the applicable rules in your case as no internal law are exactly the same even if translating the same directive. I'm not too concerned about e.g. CS:GO skins but I'll never put a reselled MS key on my PCs, I'll definitely go to OpenOffice or other open-source software IF I want to save some bucks. I cannot afford to spend money on lawyers' fees.
AFAIK fight on copyrighted software here is still going on; most cases are brought to courts by Guardia di Finanza after being discovered during investigation on financial crime & tax avoidance schemes, but BSA usually take part to court proceedings as a party damaged from the offence.

in other European Union countries as well (total population is roughly 507 million people). As per forum rules, as stated by sirius, here: 1. Trading of goods that are illegal in the seller's or buyer's country is forbidden; so, since such deals are illegal there IF any buyer or seller involved are based there such a trade is not allowed in Marketplace board.

HE COULD DO NOTHING AGAINST RULES IF HE WOULD BE BASED IN FANTASYLAND SINCE NO ONE WOULD CARE ABOUT SUCH COUNTRY MAKING A FUSS OVER IT. EUROPEAN UNION IS NOT SO AVAILABLE TO PASS OVER IT...ALSO BECAUSE OF THE TTIP DEAL (LOOK AT ENFORCEMENT PART HERE) THAT SEEMS TO BE BOUND TO INCLUDE ARMONIZATION OF IP LAWS AND RECOGNITION OF COURTS SENTENCES.

Peace & Love

Leaked EU analysis of TTIP IPR negotiations

Nothing you linked is law, TTIP is in the state of secret negotiations and nothing regarding it is currently relevant for anyone. It might get very hairy in the future, but it is not yet time to quote that.

I know this is not yet law, but I put here to try explain why the EU is not insignificant party like TECHSHARE seems to represent. 

I don't think that is legal. (Not saying it is illegal)

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

Technically, Vod has the right to put it as long as he believes that such a trade might result in a scam.
Otherwise, you will only consider it a scam only when the scam is done over with? It is a warning, lol. I don't think you will get it removed, IMO.

Technically, Vod is on the DefaultTrust list and some of those selling the keys do so for over a year without incident. There is no reason to mark them all as scammers now. I cant see one at least.
 
[1] see last reply by community mod http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/1/619568793896191005/

Probably, I would have put a neutral trust to OP as ABitNut did with JudoMS giving them benefit of doubt, at least at first. However, IMHO being such practice illegal in my jurisdiction i could be justified to give people trading in MSDN Keys a -ve trust feedback.

[SaltySpitoon]

I dont know what the problem is, if MSDN keys were illegal, they would be removed from the forum, its just against Microsoft's TOS. So while that isn't for forum moderation to handle, people can do as they wish with the trust system, Vod being on default trust puts him at a higher standard, but again he doesn't misrepresent any claims. As Vod is a Microsoft engineer, would it not make sense that he would be more involved than others?



The feedback he left doesn't misrepresent anything. It looks like a fair warning in my opinion. He doesn't say this guy scammed anyone in particular out of X BTC, he says, Microsoft can trace it back to the original MSDN subscription and invalidate all of the keys. People are still free to purchase the keys, but they should be aware that they could be invalidated.

[Quickseller]

Well he does say that the selling of the keys from MSDN subscriptions is not allowed. This implies that it is not allowed as per forum rules/the law. You had just mentioned that it is allowed per forum rules and that to your knowledge it is not illegal.

I was previously under the impression that selling these keys is against federal anti-piracy laws, however I have not been able to find anything to back this up to date. I have also been told that it is not against anti-piracy laws (also without reference). So it is really hard to say for sure one way or another if this is in fact against the law.

I also have not seen any concrete evidence as to what exactly happens once the keys are invalidated. If someone had purchased keys to Microsoft Excel for example, will they continue to be able to use it on an existing installation if they do not attempt to pursue any kind of update? (if possible please cite a source if anyone can answer this question).

My biggest concern personally is that there is somewhat of a conflict of interest. As per the quote below, Vod has said that he has a vested financial interest in Microsoft (full disclosure, I also own a moderate amount of MSFT shares personally). These sales obviously do negatively impact Microsoft's bottom line as they are not awarded the opportunity to realize the revenue they would receive from the customers of the people who are selling these keys.

Check out the marketplace, 60% sellers sell MSDN. There is no rule against selling MSDN on the forums that I know off Being legendary doesn't mean you are the God at the forums. At least give us a chance.

Send me the links, and I'll leave them negative feedback.   As a certified network engineer for Microsoft, I have a vested financial interest in that company.

The reason why this was even brought to Vod's attention was that Tomatocage had given negative trust to one of the sellers, which he removed after being told that it was not illegal (refrence).

[shorena]

-snip-
Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the legal protection of computer programs.

Thanks.

You should look for the German law that translated the said directive in national law to check the applicable rules in your case as no internal law are exactly the same even if translating the same directive.

I might, but I dont think I need to. This is mainly about copyright. We are talking about the transfer of a license. Let me quote said directive (Art 6.)

The authorisation of the rightholder shall not be required where reproduction of the code and translation of its form within the meaning of points (a) and (b) of Article 4(1) are indispensable to obtain the information necessary to achieve the interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, provided that the following conditions are met:

  (a) those acts are performed by the licensee or by another person having a right to use a copy of a program, or on their behalf by a person authorised to do so;

This right can be transmitted and this is what is done here. Selling used software has been ruled to be legal by the EuGH[1][2][3] even on a commercial level. The Dreamspark keys are unlimited use, MSDN licenses are to be used for testing. These keys are typcially marketed as MSDN keys, thus anyone that actually cares knows what they are buying. I am not saying its fine to do this. I merely arguing that these sales are not illegal, they might not even violate any law or the ToS as long as the MSDN account has been acquired legally.

I'm not too concerned about e.g. CS:GO skins but I'll never put a reselled MS key on my PCs, I'll definitely go to OpenOffice or other open-source software IF I want to save some bucks.

Thats personal preference and hardly relevant here. I have access to Dreamspark keys and I am not even giving them away to friends. There are enough OEM licenses on old laptops or on laptops someone installed linux on. Just ask the next person you see with a sticker[4][5] on their laptop the following two questions and Im certain you will have plenty of perfectly legit microsoft OS keys.

#1 Is this running on linux?
#2 If the answer to #1 is yes: May I buy the Microsoft license that came with the machine for <insert average price for beer here>?

I cannot afford to spend money on lawyers' fees.

I have reason to believe that even if MSDN keys are misused (e.g. private use) and Microsoft had a way to detect this, they have no interest in pursuing legal action.

AFAIK fight on copyrighted software here is still going on;

This is not software piracy. The software is used with a valid license, that was legally optained and transfered. Everything else is pretty much speculation. Yes, the trust system is often used on grounds of speculation, but hardly against someone with a clear trading record for a year.

-snip-
I know this is not yet law, but I put here to try explain why the EU is not insignificant party like TECHSHARE seems to represent.  

Still does not matter. There might be the idea of a law in china which would possibly concern an even bigger part of humanity. Yet, its still an idea and as such no applicable to a single chinese citizen.

However, IMHO being such practice illegal in my jurisdiction i could be justified to give people trading in MSDN Keys a -ve trust feedback.

Im pretty certain I have strong arguements that this is indeed not illegal, but lets say it was. In this case your warning should at least state the region. E.g. This user is selling eggs, which is illegal in antarctica which makes me believe the user is most likely a scammer.
The last part is usually given.

I dont know what the problem is, if MSDN keys were illegal, they would be removed from the forum, its just against Microsoft's TOS. So while that isn't for forum moderation to handle, people can do as they wish with the trust system, Vod being on default trust puts him at a higher standard, but again he doesn't misrepresent any claims. As Vod is a Microsoft engineer, would it not make sense that he would be more involved than others?



The feedback he left doesn't misrepresent anything. It looks like a fair warning in my opinion. He doesn't say this guy scammed anyone in particular out of X BTC, he says, Microsoft can trace it back to the original MSDN subscription and invalidate all of the keys. People are still free to purchase the keys, but they should be aware that they could be invalidated.

At the very least he is misusing the word illegaly in order to make his point. I think a rephrasing is in order.



[1] http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/eugh-zu-oracle-vs-usedsoft-gebrauchte-software-darf-verkauft-werden-a-842260.html
[2] http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-07/cp120094de.pdf
[3] Im sorry, but I cant find an english source on these, its EuGH case C-128/11
[4] similar, but prefably not on a Mac: http://realgeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/laptop-stickers/laptop-sticker-nerd.jpg
[5] http://i01.i.aliimg.com/wsphoto/v0/1717672545_4/15sets-lot-Hot-sale-Doodle-Luggage-STICKERS-Laptop-STICKERS-Notebook-Skins-mini-stickers-5-9cm-in.jpg

[TECSHARE]

I know this is not yet law, but I put here to try explain why the EU is not insignificant party like TECHSHARE seems to represent.  

Why is pointing out that individual jurisdictions do not apply to most of the rest of the world mean I am saying the EU is insignificant? If they banned everything that was illegal in ANY jurisdiction anywhere in the world, there would be NOTHING HERE! The forum rules state that activities are allowed as long as they are legal in both the buyer and the seller's jurisdictions an as well as the jurisdiction under which the forum resides.

I was previously under the impression that selling these keys is against federal anti-piracy laws, however I have not been able to find anything to back this up to date. I have also been told that it is not against anti-piracy laws (also without reference).

Tell me how to reference the nonexistence of a law and I will do so.

The feedback he left doesn't misrepresent anything. It looks like a fair warning in my opinion.

Clearly he calls the activity "illegal", which it is not, and additionally he calls it a "scam" which, it may or may not be, and some of these users have been operating for over a year without issue, so this is not accurate either.

Furthermore, these aren't warnings, these are hits to their reputation. A warning would be a neutral comment so that anyone who reviews their feedback can read the potential for abuse. Unfortunately he didn't do that, he just up and decided based on his interaction with one or two key sellers that he should now go around harming the reputations of every single key seller regardless of their actual trading record and satisfaction of customers. VOD is on a power trip and simply enjoys subjugating others as much as possible. None of this was necessary or really demanded by anyone (except those leaving negative ratings).

VOD is on the default trust list and has an increased ability to harm people's reputations. He has demonstrated repeatedly that he is not willing to treat his position with respect and regularly abuses his status to harass others for his own personal satisfaction.

Yet another example of his willingness to abuse his position on the default trust: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.msg10848601#msg10848601

[Quickseller]

I was previously under the impression that selling these keys is against federal anti-piracy laws, however I have not been able to find anything to back this up to date. I have also been told that it is not against anti-piracy laws (also without reference).

Tell me how to reference the nonexistence of a law and I will do so.

I think it is somewhat of a moot point now as shorena has pretty much taken care of it, at least from a EU prospective, which has resulted in me firmly believing that the negative ratings are not appropriate and should not be seen by default. However if you wanted to strengthen your argument, then you could cite US anti-piracy law, and what exactly it prohibits and then analyze what the law prohibits verses what these sellers are doing. If you really wanted to put the nail in the coffin then you could do the same with Canadian law (Vod lives in Canada).

I think what Vod is doing with these sellers is very similar to me giving a negative trust to a competing account seller solely because they are a competitor of mine, or you giving a negative to someone who sells silver only because they sell at lower prices, or Smoothie giving a negative only because they are a competing coin dealer. In any of the above cases, it would be fine if any of the above gave a negative to someone that is actually scamming or attempting to scam (stunna does this all the time with his competition when he finds shady gambling operations - which is appropriate).

While I do agree that Vod has provided a service to the community for spending a lot of time tagging a number of scammers and potential scammers, I do not think this means that he should be held to any less of a high standard to be fair with his ratings.

[Vod]

I'm less concerned about the letter of the law here, and more concerned with the fact these guys are selling products that will stop working in the future.

To me, that is a scam.   

[fonenumba]

I'm less concerned about the letter of the law here, and more concerned with the fact these guys are selling products that will stop working in the future.

To me, that is a scam.   

Do Microsoft products that have MSDN keys periodically check the Microsoft servers to make sure the keys are still valid? If not then how exactly would the products stop working once the keys are revoked?

What would you say if the sellers were to put some kind of disclosure on their sales thread? 

[cathoderay]

he has the right to leave negative feedback if he sees it fit

He does, but remember he is also accountable for his actions......

As are you Mr abusive wannabe moderator:

Keep your shit posts to one thread.....

It is not for you to decide who can post where, I will post where I want if I feel it is relevant to the topic being discussed, weather you like it or not. Your bully tactics may have worked on others, but will not work on me.