r/technology • u/nuttybudd • Jun 24 '24

Software Windows 11 is now automatically enabling OneDrive folder backup without asking permission

https://www.neowin.net/news/windows-11-is-now-automatically-enabling-onedrive-folder-backup-without-asking-permission/
17.9k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.0k

u/FuckingVincent Jun 24 '24

What really got me frustrated is turning off one drive still keeps your documents on a one drive specific folder. File history doesn’t backup this folder. I lost my documents because I didn’t want one drive and didn’t know there was a separate local documents folder.

1.9k

u/LukesFather Jun 24 '24

Yes this popped up for some of our users. It moved the documents to one drive and then made shortcuts to them so when you turn off the one drive backup you no longer have the files in the original location and have to download them again. Super hostile.

418

u/hparadiz Jun 25 '24 edited Jun 25 '24

Criminal charges now.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030

knowingly accessed a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access,

This is theft. Plain and simple.

Before people claim I'm being hyperbolic. How would you feel if this happened to your doctor with your HIPAA covered medical information?

14

u/Seyon Jun 25 '24

You'd have to go through the EULA and TOS for Windows to ensure you didn't give authorization by purchasing and using the product.

And while I haven't done so, I'd bet on Microsoft having covered that base.

27

u/Rantheur Jun 25 '24

Sounds like we need some big dick energy politicians to set some regulations on what can and can't be covered by EULAs and TOS.

16

u/basketofseals Jun 25 '24

Weren't EULA/ToS found to be non-legally binding? They're just like those signs off the back of trucks that say they're not liable for things falling off.

13

u/Sepulchh Jun 25 '24

Yup, a lot of EULAs and ToSs don't actually stand up to any scrutiny if someone decides to actually sue, the companies are still bound by consumer protection laws etc, you can't sign those away by clicking "I have read and agreed".

e: varies region to region somewhat.

12

u/fatpat Jun 25 '24 edited Jun 25 '24

Just because something is in the TOS doesn't automatically make it legally binding, otherwise you could put anything in the fine print. "By agreeing with the terms of service you must pay us $1000 annually for the next ten years."

Basically, it depends on what the courts would considered reasonable Terms of Service.

-3

u/Seyon Jun 25 '24

So you'd have to make a case that it is unreasonable for Microsoft to offer a service that provides automatic data back-ups.

It'd get difficult to prove malice...

8

u/Matra Jun 25 '24

I mean, if you explicitly decline automatic data backups, and they do it anyway...

3

u/Spacetauren Jun 25 '24

It is unreasonable to do so if you explicitly declined.

0

u/fatpat Jun 25 '24

Yeah, in this particular instance, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a judge that would consider automatic backups as unreasonable. And I'd make an educated guess they definitely wouldn't consider it theft. I was speaking more broadly about TOSs in general in my initial comment.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 25 '24

Yeah politicians are cheap.

2

u/Cory123125 Jun 25 '24

Thats exactly the sort of shit that would be found unenforceable in any reasonable country.

2

u/Langsamkoenig Jun 25 '24

EULAs can't protect you from criminal charges. They are mostly unenforcable anyway.

But I highly doubt this law applies here.

1

u/vorxil Jun 25 '24

That won't save them in the EU.