Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Help with XP Activation please!!

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
Anonymous
January 7, 2005 7:13:01 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Hi, if needs be, please redirect me to where I can get this info. I am
trying to activate my XP on a new computer. I have problems though, while
the activation wiz says it has successfully completed it, when I do a restart
the wizard and countdown comes up again.
Have called Microsoft, they say its OEM, so no help. The manufacturer is
1200 miles away (I have moved). I am worried that I may have even more
problems as I am fairly certain that an ex-employee may have stolen copies of
my software library and that they may have it registered. What can I do to
ensure that MY copy is activated successfully?!?
I really need to have this up and running well and cannot afford to buy a
new operating system again...it's robbery :o {
I appreciate any advice you can give, thank you!
--
If sponges didn't grow in the ocean...how much more water would there be ?!?

More about : activation

Anonymous
January 7, 2005 9:32:04 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

PoohsHunnyBee wrote:
> Hi, if needs be, please redirect me to where I can get this info. I am
> trying to activate my XP on a new computer. I have problems though, while
> the activation wiz says it has successfully completed it, when I do a restart
> the wizard and countdown comes up again.
> Have called Microsoft, they say its OEM, so no help. The manufacturer is
> 1200 miles away (I have moved). I am worried that I may have even more
> problems as I am fairly certain that an ex-employee may have stolen copies of
> my software library and that they may have it registered. What can I do to
> ensure that MY copy is activated successfully?!?
> I really need to have this up and running well and cannot afford to buy a
> new operating system again...it's robbery :o {
> I appreciate any advice you can give, thank you!


You say that you're trying to install/activate WinXP on a new computer.
You then say that it is an OEM license. If both statements are true,
you shouldn't be able to activate it, and the only "robbery involved"
would be your attempt to pirate the software.

An OEM version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a
motherboard or hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_
bound to the *first* PC on which it's installed. An OEM license, once
installed, is not legally transferable to another computer under _any_
circumstances.

--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH
Anonymous
January 7, 2005 10:33:04 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Hello.....thank you...I THINK. That was an aggressive and rudely assumptive
response, but since you don't know the whole story I am going to be polite
and imagine that you didn't mean to come off sounding the way you did...
at any rate, what has happened is that I bought a new computer when I opened
a business, it came with Xp installed, (I have since learned this is called
an OEM) I ALWAYS make backup copies of my software when I buy it and then
put one copy away for safe keeping.
I became seriously ill, and had to fold my business and leave the packing
etc to a staff member. When I have finally been able to go through all of
the boxes of office supplies and software I have found that most of my
original discs and some of the copies were stolen...I no longer have the
original computer, I sold it.
So, based on the conversations I have held today; what I have learned is
that the copy of Windows that I bought originally with the computer ( I DID
pay extra for the OS) is no longer any good to me since I don't have the
actual computer itself?!? If that is the case I don't know what I will do
as I cannot afford to buy a new OS. I haven't even bought a new computer as
I no longer have a sustainable income. I have been given someone's old hand
me down, but it has no OS, this is why I was trying to install my copy disc
of XP......*sigh*

"Bruce Chambers" wrote:

> PoohsHunnyBee wrote:
> > Hi, if needs be, please redirect me to where I can get this info. I am
> > trying to activate my XP on a new computer. I have problems though, while
> > the activation wiz says it has successfully completed it, when I do a restart
> > the wizard and countdown comes up again.
> > Have called Microsoft, they say its OEM, so no help. The manufacturer is
> > 1200 miles away (I have moved). I am worried that I may have even more
> > problems as I am fairly certain that an ex-employee may have stolen copies of
> > my software library and that they may have it registered. What can I do to
> > ensure that MY copy is activated successfully?!?
> > I really need to have this up and running well and cannot afford to buy a
> > new operating system again...it's robbery :o {
> > I appreciate any advice you can give, thank you!
>
>
> You say that you're trying to install/activate WinXP on a new computer.
> You then say that it is an OEM license. If both statements are true,
> you shouldn't be able to activate it, and the only "robbery involved"
> would be your attempt to pirate the software.
>
> An OEM version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a
> motherboard or hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_
> bound to the *first* PC on which it's installed. An OEM license, once
> installed, is not legally transferable to another computer under _any_
> circumstances.
>
> --
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> Help us help you:
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
> both at once. - RAH
>
Related resources
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 12:51:09 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

PoohsHunnyBee wrote:
> Hello.....thank you...I THINK. That was an aggressive and rudely assumptive
> response, but since you don't know the whole story I am going to be polite
> and imagine that you didn't mean to come off sounding the way you did...


If you don't want people coming to unwelcome conclusions, based upon
information you've provided, learn to provide all of the pertinent
information the first time.


> at any rate, what has happened is that I bought a new computer when I opened
> a business, it came with Xp installed, (I have since learned this is called
> an OEM)


So you did know what an OEM license is and that an OEM license is
permanently bound to the computer with which it is purchased and on
which it is first installed?


> I became seriously ill, and had to fold my business and leave the packing
> etc to a staff member.


This is unfortunate, and you've my sympathy. But, ultimately, it's
irrelevant.


> When I have finally been able to go through all of
> the boxes of office supplies and software I have found that most of my
> original discs and some of the copies were stolen...


Aren't you making the same "assumption" that you've accused me of
making? Have you contacted the police? Has that former employee
subsequently been charged and convicted of stealing your property?
Could the software and documents not simply have been misplaced or
over-looked in the packing process? Have you even asked the former
employee in which box these(es) items should have been stored?


> I no longer have the original computer, I sold it.


Thew you also sold that OEM license along with the computer, even if
you did keep a copy of the original installation CD. In many
jurisdictions, this would be looked upon as an attempt to defraud the
computer's purchaser. However, it conceivably may have been an innocent
mistake, if we stipulate that you had ignored all of the documentation
and the EULA when you first opened the box and turned on that first
computer. Although it does strike me that your agreeing to the terms of
a binding contract (the EULA) without first reading makes for a very
poor business practice.


> So, based on the conversations I have held today; what I have learned is
> that the copy of Windows that I bought originally with the computer ( I DID
> pay extra for the OS) is no longer any good to me since I don't have the
> actual computer itself?!?


That's correct. Had you paid extra to have a retail license included
with your purchase, you'd be able to use the license on a new computer,
so long as you can certify that it has been removed from the first
computer on which it was installed. However, you've already confirmed
that you have an OEM license, so I can only conclude that the extra
amount you paid for the OS was actually just the added cost of upgrading
it from WinXP Home to WinXP Pro.


> If that is the case I don't know what I will do
> as I cannot afford to buy a new OS. I haven't even bought a new computer as
> I no longer have a sustainable income. I have been given someone's old hand
> me down, but it has no OS, this is why I was trying to install my copy disc
> of XP......*sigh*
>

Again, this is unfortunate, and you've my sympathy. But, it's still
irrelevant. I know of no jurisdiction that accepts "I can't afford it,
but I wanted it, anyway" as a justification for what amounts to theft,
however unintentional it may or may not have been. Further, remember
that one of the prime tenets of most systems of jurisprudence is that
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse."


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 4:25:01 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Hi...thanks anyway. You have answered my questions, albeit in an incredibly
rude an sanctimonious way. Yes, I NOW know what OEM means, Yes, I DID
report it, and NO I am not trying to defraud anyone of anything. This is all
new to me, which is way I came here looking for advice, not judgement and
condescenscion. I have been here before for other issues though and the
folks have always been helpful so I am going to cling to that and not be
turned off by the negative, unfriendly and arrogant manner you have brought
to this discussion.
Thanks again for clearing things up...I won't bother you with any more on
this :o }

"PoohsHunnyBee" wrote:

> Hello.....thank you...I THINK. That was an aggressive and rudely assumptive
> response, but since you don't know the whole story I am going to be polite
> and imagine that you didn't mean to come off sounding the way you did...
> at any rate, what has happened is that I bought a new computer when I opened
> a business, it came with Xp installed, (I have since learned this is called
> an OEM) I ALWAYS make backup copies of my software when I buy it and then
> put one copy away for safe keeping.
> I became seriously ill, and had to fold my business and leave the packing
> etc to a staff member. When I have finally been able to go through all of
> the boxes of office supplies and software I have found that most of my
> original discs and some of the copies were stolen...I no longer have the
> original computer, I sold it.
> So, based on the conversations I have held today; what I have learned is
> that the copy of Windows that I bought originally with the computer ( I DID
> pay extra for the OS) is no longer any good to me since I don't have the
> actual computer itself?!? If that is the case I don't know what I will do
> as I cannot afford to buy a new OS. I haven't even bought a new computer as
> I no longer have a sustainable income. I have been given someone's old hand
> me down, but it has no OS, this is why I was trying to install my copy disc
> of XP......*sigh*
>
> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
>
> > PoohsHunnyBee wrote:
> > > Hi, if needs be, please redirect me to where I can get this info. I am
> > > trying to activate my XP on a new computer. I have problems though, while
> > > the activation wiz says it has successfully completed it, when I do a restart
> > > the wizard and countdown comes up again.
> > > Have called Microsoft, they say its OEM, so no help. The manufacturer is
> > > 1200 miles away (I have moved). I am worried that I may have even more
> > > problems as I am fairly certain that an ex-employee may have stolen copies of
> > > my software library and that they may have it registered. What can I do to
> > > ensure that MY copy is activated successfully?!?
> > > I really need to have this up and running well and cannot afford to buy a
> > > new operating system again...it's robbery :o {
> > > I appreciate any advice you can give, thank you!
> >
> >
> > You say that you're trying to install/activate WinXP on a new computer.
> > You then say that it is an OEM license. If both statements are true,
> > you shouldn't be able to activate it, and the only "robbery involved"
> > would be your attempt to pirate the software.
> >
> > An OEM version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a
> > motherboard or hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_
> > bound to the *first* PC on which it's installed. An OEM license, once
> > installed, is not legally transferable to another computer under _any_
> > circumstances.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Bruce Chambers
> >
> > Help us help you:
> > http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> > http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
> >
> > You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
> > both at once. - RAH
> >
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 7:17:51 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Hi,

> An OEM version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a
> motherboard or hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_
> bound to the *first* PC on which it's installed. An OEM license, once
> installed, is not legally transferable to another computer under _any_
> circumstances.

By the way, that is not fully correct if you take the legal situation in
other countries in consideration. Here in Germany for instance it has
been assessed some years ago by a high court decision that it is fully
legal to sell OEM-software, which has been de-bundeled from the
hardware. It goes without saying that it has to be an original OEM
version with certificate, registration number etc..

Kind regards

Peter
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 7:17:52 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Peter Loosen wrote:
> Hi,
>

>
> By the way, that is not fully correct if you take the legal situation in
> other countries in consideration. Here in Germany for instance it has
> been assessed some years ago by a high court decision that it is fully
> legal to sell OEM-software, which has been de-bundeled from the
> hardware. It goes without saying that it has to be an original OEM
> version with certificate, registration number etc..
>


Did that court decision specifically stated that its decision applied
to *all* OEM software, or was it a more narrow case involving one
specific software product/class bundled with one specific piece or class
of hardware? Were specific conditions stipulated? Otherwise, if this
trend continues, I would expect international computer and software
manufacturers to start abandoning the German market. Who'd want to try
to do business in a country that disregards the intellectual property
and contract laws of other nations?


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 9:49:26 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Dear Bruce,

> Did that court decision specifically stated that its decision
> applied to *all* OEM software, or was it a more narrow case involving
> one specific software product/class bundled with one specific piece or
> class of hardware? Were specific conditions stipulated?
If I remember rigth it was a case which dealt with a Microsoft OS. But
since this decision this legal position is generally applied here in
Germany to any kind of software.

> Otherwise, if
> this trend continues, I would expect international computer and software
> manufacturers to start abandoning the German market.
This is not very likely, at least MS is still doing business here in
Germany.

>Who'd want to try
> to do business in a country that disregards the intellectual property
> and contract laws of other nations?
Why are intellectual property rights violated? The court decision says,
that the customer is free to use the property right he received which
the purchase of the software to utilize the software on any kind of
hardware. Well that´s the point of view of the german high court and it
goes without saying that other countries migth have (and in factt do
have) other ways of interpreting intelectual property issues. But I
think that each country has to respect the positions of his partner
countries and has to accept (and in fact does) if there is a different
way to interprete general rules - at least this is my point of view.


Kind regards

Peter
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 9:49:27 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Peter Loosen wrote:

>
> If I remember rigth it was a case which dealt with a Microsoft OS. But
> since this decision this legal position is generally applied here in
> Germany to any kind of software.
>

Recollection is nice, but, as we all know, sometimes faulty. Can you
provide a link to the specific decision?


>
> This is not very likely, at least MS is still doing business here in
> Germany.
>

That would tell me that the decision most likely does *not* apply to
all OEM software equally. As a test, exactly what does the OEM license
for a German version of WinXP state, regarding transfers? Has there
been a court decision that has specifically the German WinXP OEM EULA
invalid?


>
> Why are intellectual property rights violated?


Because the software may be being used in a manner contrary to the
copyright holder's permission. That's why I'm asking for specifics. In
any jurisdiction that claims to respects the concept of intellectual
property, the rights of the copyright holder _have_ to take precedence.
Only if the copyright holder's terms are found to be in violation of
law or to considered unconscionable in a "reasonable person" test could
they be questioned.


> it
> goes without saying that other countries migth have (and in factt do
> have) other ways of interpreting intelectual property issues. But I
> think that each country has to respect the positions of his partner
> countries and has to accept (and in fact does) if there is a different
> way to interprete general rules - at least this is my point of view.
>
>


Certainly different countries currently have different
"interpretations" of intellectual property. The more individualistic
and more commercially oriented United States usually takes a position
that strongly favors the rights of the individual copyright holder over
those of the "masses." The "social democratic" (And I'm using the term
in its vaguest possible connotation to describe the differences in
outlook from my perspective, not to assign specific political leanings.)
governments of Europe seem to take a more relaxed view regarding the
rights of an individual or a business, as opposed to the rights of the
anonymous "masses." Both viewpoints have their pros and cons, the
discussion of which is really beyond the scope of this newsgroup.

That digression aside, I don't see how any country could expect it's
own intellectual property laws to be respected by other countries once
it's shown a propensity to disregard the laws of its trading partners.
I think that there will eventually have to come a day of reckoning, and
the UN and WTO will probably have to establish some kind of standards.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 9:49:27 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Hello Peter...
I am sorry that your participation in this conversation took such a nasty
turn. I am all for debate and freedom, I am also about protecting rights,
I came here to learn what my options were and instead of just having them
laid out I got a massive lecture and a *giggle* stern talking to...some
people maybe don't have an arena that will listen to them in life and it
makes them feel exceedingly important to pontificate in a venue where we
can't simply walk away and ignore them. It's too bad though, he seems like
an intelligent guy that we could learn a lot from. It's somehow ironic that
the people whom Microsoft designates as "MVP" may have impressive, even
admirable skills with the computer and they may indeed be devoted acolytes of
Microsoft but is there any kind of screening for manners and courtesy? How
about social skills in general? At any rate, maybe he will be intelligent
enough to reconsider his manners and opinion delivery and this will be a much
more enjoyable experience for others in the future.

"Peter Loosen" wrote:

> Dear Bruce,
>
> > Did that court decision specifically stated that its decision
> > applied to *all* OEM software, or was it a more narrow case involving
> > one specific software product/class bundled with one specific piece or
> > class of hardware? Were specific conditions stipulated?
> If I remember rigth it was a case which dealt with a Microsoft OS. But
> since this decision this legal position is generally applied here in
> Germany to any kind of software.
>
> > Otherwise, if
> > this trend continues, I would expect international computer and software
> > manufacturers to start abandoning the German market.
> This is not very likely, at least MS is still doing business here in
> Germany.
>
> >Who'd want to try
> > to do business in a country that disregards the intellectual property
> > and contract laws of other nations?
> Why are intellectual property rights violated? The court decision says,
> that the customer is free to use the property right he received which
> the purchase of the software to utilize the software on any kind of
> hardware. Well that´s the point of view of the german high court and it
> goes without saying that other countries migth have (and in factt do
> have) other ways of interpreting intelectual property issues. But I
> think that each country has to respect the positions of his partner
> countries and has to accept (and in fact does) if there is a different
> way to interprete general rules - at least this is my point of view.
>
>
> Kind regards
>
> Peter
>
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 9:49:28 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Hello Peter...
I am sorry that your participation in this conversation took such a nasty
turn. I am all for debate and freedom, I am also about protecting rights,
I came here to learn what my options were and instead of just having them
laid out I got a massive lecture and a *giggle* stern talking to...some
people maybe don't have an arena that will listen to them in life and it
makes them feel exceedingly important to pontificate in a venue where we
can't simply walk away and ignore them. It's too bad though, he seems like
an intelligent guy that we could learn a lot from. Ironic that Microsoft may
not take courtesy into account when they designate "MVP", it is one thing to
know a lot about computers, admirable maybe, but it certainly does not make
you a nice or even a good person. Maybe he will be intelligent enough to
reconsider his manners and opinion delivery and this will be a much more
enjoyable experience for others in the future.

"Bruce Chambers" wrote:

> Peter Loosen wrote:
>
> >
> > If I remember rigth it was a case which dealt with a Microsoft OS. But
> > since this decision this legal position is generally applied here in
> > Germany to any kind of software.
> >
>
> Recollection is nice, but, as we all know, sometimes faulty. Can you
> provide a link to the specific decision?
>
>
> >
> > This is not very likely, at least MS is still doing business here in
> > Germany.
> >
>
> That would tell me that the decision most likely does *not* apply to
> all OEM software equally. As a test, exactly what does the OEM license
> for a German version of WinXP state, regarding transfers? Has there
> been a court decision that has specifically the German WinXP OEM EULA
> invalid?
>
>
> >
> > Why are intellectual property rights violated?
>
>
> Because the software may be being used in a manner contrary to the
> copyright holder's permission. That's why I'm asking for specifics. In
> any jurisdiction that claims to respects the concept of intellectual
> property, the rights of the copyright holder _have_ to take precedence.
> Only if the copyright holder's terms are found to be in violation of
> law or to considered unconscionable in a "reasonable person" test could
> they be questioned.
>
>
> > it
> > goes without saying that other countries migth have (and in factt do
> > have) other ways of interpreting intelectual property issues. But I
> > think that each country has to respect the positions of his partner
> > countries and has to accept (and in fact does) if there is a different
> > way to interprete general rules - at least this is my point of view.
> >
> >
>
>
> Certainly different countries currently have different
> "interpretations" of intellectual property. The more individualistic
> and more commercially oriented United States usually takes a position
> that strongly favors the rights of the individual copyright holder over
> those of the "masses." The "social democratic" (And I'm using the term
> in its vaguest possible connotation to describe the differences in
> outlook from my perspective, not to assign specific political leanings.)
> governments of Europe seem to take a more relaxed view regarding the
> rights of an individual or a business, as opposed to the rights of the
> anonymous "masses." Both viewpoints have their pros and cons, the
> discussion of which is really beyond the scope of this newsgroup.
>
> That digression aside, I don't see how any country could expect it's
> own intellectual property laws to be respected by other countries once
> it's shown a propensity to disregard the laws of its trading partners.
> I think that there will eventually have to come a day of reckoning, and
> the UN and WTO will probably have to establish some kind of standards.
>
>
> --
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> Help us help you:
> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
> both at once. - RAH
>
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 12:01:28 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

> Recollection is nice, but, as we all know, sometimes faulty. Can
> you provide a link to the specific decision?
>
>
> That would tell me that the decision most likely does *not* apply to
> all OEM software equally. As a test, exactly what does the OEM license
> for a German version of WinXP state, regarding transfers? Has there
> been a court decision that has specifically the German WinXP OEM EULA
> invalid?

Though I guess that it will no be understandable for you (in twofold
sense), here is one link:

http://www.golem.de/0007/8621.html

"Der unter anderem für das Urheberrecht zuständige I. Zivilsenat des
Bundesgerichtshofes hat entschieden, dass ein Softwareunternehmen keine
Ansprüche gegen einen mit ihm vertraglich nicht verbundenen Händler
geltend machen kann, wenn dieser ausdrücklich als OEM-Software
gekennzeichnete Ware - also Software, die nur mit einem neuen PC
vertrieben werden soll - isoliert an einen Verbraucher veräußert....."

Peter
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 12:03:14 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Hallo,

PoohsHunnyBee schrieb:
> Hello Peter...
> I am sorry that your participation in this conversation took such a nasty
> turn.

No problem.

> you a nice or even a good person. Maybe he will be intelligent enough to
> reconsider his manners and opinion delivery and this will be a much more
> enjoyable experience for others in the future.

I agree with you, best regards

Peter
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 12:19:05 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Peter Loosen wrote:

>
>
> Though I guess that it will no be understandable for you (in twofold
> sense), here is one link:
>
> http://www.golem.de/0007/8621.html
>
> "Der unter anderem für das Urheberrecht zuständige I. Zivilsenat des
> Bundesgerichtshofes hat entschieden, dass ein Softwareunternehmen keine
> Ansprüche gegen einen mit ihm vertraglich nicht verbundenen Händler
> geltend machen kann, wenn dieser ausdrücklich als OEM-Software
> gekennzeichnete Ware - also Software, die nur mit einem neuen PC
> vertrieben werden soll - isoliert an einen Verbraucher veräußert....."
>
> Peter


Well, you're correct in at least one sense. What little German I know
is very rusty, now, and the on-line translators - while useful for
individual words - are woefully inadequate in this case.

I did glean enough to understand your point of view, although I'll
never concede that it's right, in the sense of just or fair. If that
news article is accurate, (and if the two translators I used didn't both
independently arrive at identically incorrect translations) it seems
clear that German law has little no respect of the work of software
developers or authors, and even goes so far as to say they're very
limited and considers the protection of their "rights" as a strange idea.

This does confirm my expectation that Europe's creeping socialism may
someday make it a completely unreliable trading partner, particularly
where intellectual property is involved. What the final ramifications
of this trend will be, I cannot say.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:23:24 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Bruce Chambers,

I am totally struck by this! I am one of those people that tries not
to break *any* law, even the speed limits, and this is distressing to
me. If this is true about the nature of OEM licenses, I have been giving
many people completely *bogus* advice on OEM versions of WinXP (I'm a
MCSE and really should know better, I guess. I need some re-education
here. ... which brings up my question...)

Bruce, would you mind posting the Microsoft link that states the
policies of usage for the OEM versions of the software? I have been
telling people that it's the same except for 3 things:
1) you must buy it with hardware used to assemble a computer
2) you do not get the box and it's "extras"
3) you do not get technical support

I guess I was way off. I appreciate any help to steer me back to the
straight and narrow. :)  Thanks.

-david matson





Bruce Chambers wrote:
> Peter Loosen wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Though I guess that it will no be understandable for you (in twofold
>> sense), here is one link:
>>
>> http://www.golem.de/0007/8621.html
>>
>> "Der unter anderem für das Urheberrecht zuständige I. Zivilsenat des
>> Bundesgerichtshofes hat entschieden, dass ein Softwareunternehmen
>> keine Ansprüche gegen einen mit ihm vertraglich nicht verbundenen
>> Händler geltend machen kann, wenn dieser ausdrücklich als OEM-Software
>> gekennzeichnete Ware - also Software, die nur mit einem neuen PC
>> vertrieben werden soll - isoliert an einen Verbraucher veräußert....."
>>
>> Peter
>
>
>
> Well, you're correct in at least one sense. What little German I
> know is very rusty, now, and the on-line translators - while useful for
> individual words - are woefully inadequate in this case.
>
> I did glean enough to understand your point of view, although I'll
> never concede that it's right, in the sense of just or fair. If that
> news article is accurate, (and if the two translators I used didn't both
> independently arrive at identically incorrect translations) it seems
> clear that German law has little no respect of the work of software
> developers or authors, and even goes so far as to say they're very
> limited and considers the protection of their "rights" as a strange idea.
>
> This does confirm my expectation that Europe's creeping socialism
> may someday make it a completely unreliable trading partner,
> particularly where intellectual property is involved. What the final
> ramifications of this trend will be, I cannot say.
>
>
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 2:31:20 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

David;
The details are in the EULA.
The OEM EULA differs from the retail EULA.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"David Matson" <david-matson@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:o i3kjzt9EHA.3260@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Bruce Chambers,
>
> I am totally struck by this! I am one of those people that tries not to
> break *any* law, even the speed limits, and this is distressing to me. If
> this is true about the nature of OEM licenses, I have been giving many
> people completely *bogus* advice on OEM versions of WinXP (I'm a MCSE and
> really should know better, I guess. I need some re-education here. ...
> which brings up my question...)
>
> Bruce, would you mind posting the Microsoft link that states the policies
> of usage for the OEM versions of the software? I have been telling people
> that it's the same except for 3 things:
> 1) you must buy it with hardware used to assemble a computer
> 2) you do not get the box and it's "extras"
> 3) you do not get technical support
>
> I guess I was way off. I appreciate any help to steer me back to the
> straight and narrow. :)  Thanks.
>
> -david matson
>
>
>
>
>
> Bruce Chambers wrote:
>> Peter Loosen wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Though I guess that it will no be understandable for you (in twofold
>>> sense), here is one link:
>>>
>>> http://www.golem.de/0007/8621.html
>>>
>>> "Der unter anderem für das Urheberrecht zuständige I. Zivilsenat des
>>> Bundesgerichtshofes hat entschieden, dass ein Softwareunternehmen keine
>>> Ansprüche gegen einen mit ihm vertraglich nicht verbundenen Händler
>>> geltend machen kann, wenn dieser ausdrücklich als OEM-Software
>>> gekennzeichnete Ware - also Software, die nur mit einem neuen PC
>>> vertrieben werden soll - isoliert an einen Verbraucher veräußert....."
>>>
>>> Peter
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, you're correct in at least one sense. What little German I
>> know is very rusty, now, and the on-line translators - while useful for
>> individual words - are woefully inadequate in this case.
>>
>> I did glean enough to understand your point of view, although I'll
>> never concede that it's right, in the sense of just or fair. If that
>> news article is accurate, (and if the two translators I used didn't both
>> independently arrive at identically incorrect translations) it seems
>> clear that German law has little no respect of the work of software
>> developers or authors, and even goes so far as to say they're very
>> limited and considers the protection of their "rights" as a strange idea.
>>
>> This does confirm my expectation that Europe's creeping socialism may
>> someday make it a completely unreliable trading partner, particularly
>> where intellectual property is involved. What the final ramifications of
>> this trend will be, I cannot say.
>>
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 2:31:21 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

Jupiter Jones,

Thanks for that swift reply, btw! :)  You are totally correct! I have
a computer under an OEM license (xp) at home and it reads like this:

"...THIS LICENSE MAY NOT BE SHARED, TRANSFERRED TO OR
USED CONCURRENTLY ON DIFFERENT COMPUTERS.
The SOFTWARE is licensed with the COMPUTER as a single
integrated product and may only be used with the COMPUTER. If
the SOFTWARE is not accompanied by HARDWARE, you may not use
the SOFTWARE. You may permanently transfer all of your rights
under this EULA only as part of a permanent sale or transfer
of the COMPUTER, provided you retain no copies, if you
transfer the SOFTWARE (including all component parts, the
media, any upgrades, this EULA and the Certificate of
Authenticity), and the recipient agrees to the terms of this
EULA. ..."

(truncated)

"as a single integrated product" seems to state clearly that the OEM xp
license and the hardware it gets installed to, becomes one with this
EULA. <<I'm not eloquent, I know. :)  >>

.... but man, they really need to make a layman's version of that EULA...
Reading the KJV or Shakespeare is easier than this, and many people have
to retake English several times! :) 

-matson



Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
> David;
> The details are in the EULA.
> The OEM EULA differs from the retail EULA.
>
Anonymous
February 6, 2005 1:02:48 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

That is correct. Your OEM version of XP can only be used on the origional
computer system. That is the reason why Microsoft consideres your New
Computer not registered.


"PoohsHunnyBee" <PoohsHunnyBee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F2EE417F-A548-4388-98EC-EC28BBF1CBFF@microsoft.com...
> Hello.....thank you...I THINK. That was an aggressive and rudely
> assumptive
> response, but since you don't know the whole story I am going to be polite
> and imagine that you didn't mean to come off sounding the way you did...
> at any rate, what has happened is that I bought a new computer when I
> opened
> a business, it came with Xp installed, (I have since learned this is
> called
> an OEM) I ALWAYS make backup copies of my software when I buy it and then
> put one copy away for safe keeping.
> I became seriously ill, and had to fold my business and leave the packing
> etc to a staff member. When I have finally been able to go through all of
> the boxes of office supplies and software I have found that most of my
> original discs and some of the copies were stolen...I no longer have the
> original computer, I sold it.
> So, based on the conversations I have held today; what I have learned is
> that the copy of Windows that I bought originally with the computer ( I
> DID
> pay extra for the OS) is no longer any good to me since I don't have the
> actual computer itself?!? If that is the case I don't know what I will
> do
> as I cannot afford to buy a new OS. I haven't even bought a new computer
> as
> I no longer have a sustainable income. I have been given someone's old
> hand
> me down, but it has no OS, this is why I was trying to install my copy
> disc
> of XP......*sigh*
>
> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
>
>> PoohsHunnyBee wrote:
>> > Hi, if needs be, please redirect me to where I can get this info. I am
>> > trying to activate my XP on a new computer. I have problems though,
>> > while
>> > the activation wiz says it has successfully completed it, when I do a
>> > restart
>> > the wizard and countdown comes up again.
>> > Have called Microsoft, they say its OEM, so no help. The manufacturer
>> > is
>> > 1200 miles away (I have moved). I am worried that I may have even more
>> > problems as I am fairly certain that an ex-employee may have stolen
>> > copies of
>> > my software library and that they may have it registered. What can I
>> > do to
>> > ensure that MY copy is activated successfully?!?
>> > I really need to have this up and running well and cannot afford to buy
>> > a
>> > new operating system again...it's robbery :o {
>> > I appreciate any advice you can give, thank you!
>>
>>
>> You say that you're trying to install/activate WinXP on a new computer.
>> You then say that it is an OEM license. If both statements are true,
>> you shouldn't be able to activate it, and the only "robbery involved"
>> would be your attempt to pirate the software.
>>
>> An OEM version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a
>> motherboard or hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_
>> bound to the *first* PC on which it's installed. An OEM license, once
>> installed, is not legally transferable to another computer under _any_
>> circumstances.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Bruce Chambers
>>
>> Help us help you:
>> http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>>
>> You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
>> both at once. - RAH
>>
!