Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Licence for WinXP Home OEM

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
September 16, 2005 4:14:03 PM

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

I have Windows XP OEM Home, that came with new computer about 3-4 years ago.
Computer went dead a long time ago and was dissambled.

Can i use this Windows XP Home OEM on other computer?

More about : licence winxp home oem

Anonymous
September 16, 2005 4:50:50 PM

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

In news:D 8B86452-7A50-4FEF-8DC5-CEE559A57ABC@microsoft.com,
Alex <Alex@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:

> I have Windows XP OEM Home, that came with new computer about
> 3-4
> years ago. Computer went dead a long time ago and was
> dissambled.
>
> Can i use this Windows XP Home OEM on other computer?


One of the major disadvantages of OEM versions is that their
license ties them permanently to the first computer they are
installed on. So no, you may not legally do this.

Moreover, it may not even be possible. Some OEM copies are
BIOS-locked to the computer they came with.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup
September 16, 2005 5:21:02 PM

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

"Ken Blake" wrote:


> One of the major disadvantages of OEM versions is that their
> license ties them permanently to the first computer they are
> installed on. So no, you may not legally do this.
>
>
> --
> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
> Please reply to the newsgroup
>
>
Where in EULA or in booklet (came with OEM) this is said?
I only found that support is provided by OEM partner, and that this is sold
with new computers. But i don't any words about permanent connection to first
computer.
I thought, that if XP OEM will install on computer, than all is good?
Related resources
Anonymous
September 16, 2005 5:48:04 PM

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

In news:D 0589849-1827-4922-A93A-594878D43066@microsoft.com,
Alex <Alex@discussions.microsoft.com> typed:

> "Ken Blake" wrote:
>
>
>> One of the major disadvantages of OEM versions is that their
>> license ties them permanently to the first computer they are
>> installed on. So no, you may not legally do this.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
>> Please reply to the newsgroup
>>
>>
> Where in EULA or in booklet (came with OEM) this is said?


In this paragraph of the OEM EULA:

" * Software as a Component of the Computer - Transfer. THIS
LICENSE MAY NOT BE SHARED,
TRANSFERRED TO OR USED CONCURRENTLY
ON DIFFERENT COMPUTERS. The SOFTWARE
is licensed with the HARDWARE as a single integrated
product and may only be used with the HARDWARE. If the
SOFTWARE is not accompanied by new 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 HARDWARE, provided
you retain no copies, if you transfer all of the SOFTWARE
(including all component parts, the media and printed
materials, any upgrades, this EULA and the Certificate
of Authenticity), and the recipient agrees to the terms
of this EULA. If the SOFTWARE is an upgrade, any
transfer must also include all prior versions of the
SOFTWARE. "


> I only found that support is provided by OEM partner, and that
> this
> is sold with new computers. But i don't any words about
> permanent
> connection to first computer.
> I thought, that if XP OEM will install on computer, than all is
> good?


Sorry, I can't understand that last sentence at all. Can you
clarify it?

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup
Anonymous
September 16, 2005 6:28:48 PM

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

"Alex" <Alex@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:D 8B86452-7A50-4FEF-8DC5-CEE559A57ABC@microsoft.com
> I have Windows XP OEM Home, that came with new computer about 3-4
> years ago. Computer went dead a long time ago and was dissambled.
>
> Can i use this Windows XP Home OEM on other computer?

Depending on the computer manufacturer, it may well be tied to the BIOS on
the old computer.

--
Frank Saunders, MS-MVP OE
Please respond in Newsgroup only. Do not send email
http://www.fjsmjs.com
Protect your PC
http://www.microsoft.com./athome/security/protect/defau...
http://defendingyourmachine.blogspot.com/
Anonymous
September 16, 2005 7:23:48 PM

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

Alex wrote:
> I have Windows XP OEM Home, that came with new computer about 3-4
> years ago. Computer went dead a long time ago and was dissambled.
>
> Can i use this Windows XP Home OEM on other computer?

According to MS, no. According to reality, maybe, if you can come up
with a story that is very convincing.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
Anonymous
September 16, 2005 7:32:31 PM

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

An OEM license for Windows XP is permanently bound to the first
computer it is installed and activated on. If your computer dies,
so does the license. Only a "Retail Version" of Windows XP may
be transferred to another computer system.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User
Microsoft Newsgroups

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Alex" wrote:

| Where in EULA or in booklet (came with OEM) this is said?
| I only found that support is provided by OEM partner, and that this is sold
| with new computers. But i don't any words about permanent connection to first
| computer.
| I thought, that if XP OEM will install on computer, than all is good?
September 17, 2005 2:42:43 AM

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

On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 15:32:31 -0500, "Carey Frisch [MVP]"
<cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>An OEM license for Windows XP is permanently bound to the first
>computer it is installed and activated on. If your computer dies,
>so does the license. Only a "Retail Version" of Windows XP may
>be transferred to another computer system.

Alex sorry about the Hijack

Carey I have changed a faulty MOBO several times in the past for
clients and got the OEM re-activated after calling M$ and explaining,
never had a problem. Presumably this is at M$ discretion but if I can
get a new MOBO fitted and activated I can then change all the other
components over a several months and end up with a "New" PC with the
OEM from a totally different PC?

Actually I have done just that with one of mine, the only original
component now is the front USB slot and its not connected. Changes
started with the MOBO, M$ re-activated it for me and went on for about
8 months. Still on its original SP1 OEM Installation and it validates.
OK its the only PC I know of out of the hundreds I fix which is
entirely different from its original spec but there must be more.

Jonah
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 12:04:54 PM

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

Been reading the OEM posts/replies for sometime now. Find them very
inaccurate regarding my own experiences with my own home PC.
Specifically OEM XP w/SP1, purchased with hardware type OEM.

First clean installed on homebuilt PC. Then, a motherboard change. Did
another clean install. Activated fine over the internet. Many hardware
changes later, was forced to reactivate. MS gave me a new product key,
after I gave them the former product key. No questions asked.

So, I read all the mumbo-jumbo legal stuff spouted by those who are just ab
libbing. Glad to see someone with some reality experience. Thanks for
sharing some reality, not ab libbing.
"Jonah" <jonah@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:0aemi19iqn29q2rari1mfl1dmakgnbj90s@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 15:32:31 -0500, "Carey Frisch [MVP]"
> <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >An OEM license for Windows XP is permanently bound to the first
> >computer it is installed and activated on. If your computer dies,
> >so does the license. Only a "Retail Version" of Windows XP may
> >be transferred to another computer system.
>
> Alex sorry about the Hijack
>
> Carey I have changed a faulty MOBO several times in the past for
> clients and got the OEM re-activated after calling M$ and explaining,
> never had a problem. Presumably this is at M$ discretion but if I can
> get a new MOBO fitted and activated I can then change all the other
> components over a several months and end up with a "New" PC with the
> OEM from a totally different PC?
>
> Actually I have done just that with one of mine, the only original
> component now is the front USB slot and its not connected. Changes
> started with the MOBO, M$ re-activated it for me and went on for about
> 8 months. Still on its original SP1 OEM Installation and it validates.
> OK its the only PC I know of out of the hundreds I fix which is
> entirely different from its original spec but there must be more.
>
> Jonah
>
>
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 1:36:42 PM

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

Alex wrote:
> I have Windows XP OEM Home, that came with new computer about 3-4 years ago.
> Computer went dead a long time ago and was dissambled.
>
> Can i use this Windows XP Home OEM on other computer?


Technically, the answer depends upon the specific type of OEM
installation CD you received with the computer. If it was a generic OEM
CD, such as distributed by small systems builders, it should install.
If, however, you have a branded OEM CD provided by a major computer
manufacturer, it probably will not install, and almost certainly should
not activate. If you have an OEM Recovery/Restore CD, it very probably
can't be used on any computer other than the make/model for which it was
designed.

Legally, the answer depends upon where you live. If you live in the
United States, or another country that recognizes intellectual property
laws that actually protect the creator of the property, and/or the laws
of other countries, then 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. If, however, you live in a country where
intellectual property laws and the rights of the creators are given
short shrift, such as Russia, China, India, and parts of the EU, then it
may be legal to reuse an OEM license. Of course, such "legality" does
not magically bestow technical capability, so the conditions mentioned
in the first paragraph still apply.

Ultimately, the answer depends upon *your* sense ethics. When you
first booted up that old computer with the OEM license, you were
prompted to either agree to the license terms, or not. From your post,
it seems clear that you agreed to be bound by the terms of the OEM
license. So, if your given word has *NO* value, if your signature on a
contract is meaningless, if you have no integrity, then you can feel
free to attempt to reuse that OEM license.


--

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
September 17, 2005 1:41:38 PM

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

Alex wrote:
>

>
> Where in EULA or in booklet (came with OEM) this is said?
> I only found that support is provided by OEM partner, and that this is sold
> with new computers. But i don't any words about permanent connection to first
> computer.


From the WinXP OEM EULA:

"The term 'COMPUTER' as used herein shall mean the HARDWARE, if the
HARDWARE is a single computer system, or shall mean the computer system
with which the HARDWARE operates, if the HARDWARE is a computer system
component."

"The SOFTWARE is licensed with the HARDWARE as a single integrated
product and may only be used with the HARDWARE. If the SOFTWARE is
not accompanied by new 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 HARDWARE, provided you retain no
copies, if you transfer all of the SOFTWARE (including all component
parts, the media and printed materials, any upgrades, this EULA and the
Certificate of Authenticity), and the recipient agrees to the terms
of this EULA."



> I thought, that if XP OEM will install on computer, than all is good?


Even if it installs, it may not activate, as Microsoft has recently
tightened the activation process as it regards OEM licenses.



--

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
September 17, 2005 1:42:43 PM

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

Jonah wrote:
>
> Carey I have changed a faulty MOBO several times in the past for
> clients and got the OEM re-activated after calling M$ and explaining,
> never had a problem. Presumably this is at M$ discretion but if I can
> get a new MOBO fitted and activated I can then change all the other
> components over a several months and end up with a "New" PC with the
> OEM from a totally different PC?
>
> Actually I have done just that with one of mine, the only original
> component now is the front USB slot and its not connected. Changes
> started with the MOBO, M$ re-activated it for me and went on for about
> 8 months. Still on its original SP1 OEM Installation and it validates.
> OK its the only PC I know of out of the hundreds I fix which is
> entirely different from its original spec but there must be more.
>
> Jonah
>
>


According to its EULA, an OEM license may not be transferred from
one distinct PC to another PC. Nothing is said about prohibiting one
from repairing or upgrading the PC on which an OEM license is installed.

Now, some people believe that the motherboard is the key component
that defines the "original computer," but the OEM EULA does not make any
such distinction. Others have said that one could successfully argue
that it's the PC's case that is the deciding component, as that is where
one is instructed to affix the OEM CoA label w/Product Key. Again, the
EULA does not specifically define any single component as the computer.
Licensed Microsoft Systems Builders, who are allowed to distribute OEM
licenses with computers they sell, are contractually obligated to
"define" the computer as the motherboard, but this limitation/definition
can't be applied to the end user until the EULA is re-written. This is
the catch that has caught the OP: the computer manufacturer has to treat
the repaired/upgraded computer as a different computer. Had the OP
obtained the replacement motherboard from the original manufacturer,
this issue wouldn't have arisen.

Microsoft has, to date, been very careful _not_ publicly to define
when an incrementally upgraded computer ceases to be the original
computer. The closest I've ever seen a Microsoft employee come to this
definition (in a public forum) is to tell the person making the inquiry
to consult the PC's manufacturer. As the OEM license's support is
solely the responsibility of said manufacturer, they should determine
what sort of hardware changes to allow before the warranty and support
agreements are voided. To paraphrase: An incrementally upgraded
computer ceases to be the original computer, as pertains to the OEM
EULA, only when the *OEM* says it's a different computer. If you've
built the system yourself, and used a generic OEM CD, then _you_ are the
"OEM," and _you_ get to decide when you'll no longer support your product.




--

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
September 17, 2005 1:47:43 PM

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

Winux P wrote:

>
>
> If over the phone activation
> is required, you tell the lovely PA person, you're activing this copy of XP
> again cause your rebuilding after a corrupted system, like severe damage by
> a virus or something.


So, it's your presumption that the OP should be as totally lacking in
integrity as you, and should be willing to lie? Granted, it's a sad
world, but not everyone has yet sunk to your level.


>It's your WinXP, you paid for it, the decision is
> yours.


Ah, proof of concept! An outright lie. We all know perfectly well
that WinXP does not belong to the OP. It's intellectual property that
belongs to its creator. The only thing the OP ever purchased was a
license to use the product in accordance with the terms of said license.



> EULA is so loop hole infested ....
>


Name one. Better yet, name a single court decision that invalidates
the EULA.


--

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
September 17, 2005 4:04:34 PM

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

Bruce Chambers wrote:
> Winux P wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> If over the phone activation
>> is required, you tell the lovely PA person, you're activing this
>> copy of XP again cause your rebuilding after a corrupted system,
>> like severe damage by a virus or something.
>
>
> So, it's your presumption that the OP should be as totally lacking in
> integrity as you, and should be willing to lie? Granted, it's a sad
> world, but not everyone has yet sunk to your level.

It is more like sinking to MS's level. MS has yet to legally prove that
they have the right to limit a persons use in the privacy of their home,
so one FUD deserves another.

>> It's your WinXP, you paid for it, the decision is
>> yours.
>
>
> Ah, proof of concept! An outright lie. We all know perfectly well
> that WinXP does not belong to the OP. It's intellectual property that
> belongs to its creator.

Wrong. It is copyrighted material, and the author(s) is/are not
necessarily the owners of the copyright.

The copyright owner owns the copyright. The individual owns his/her
copy of copyright material.

> The only thing the OP ever purchased was a
> license to use the product in accordance with the terms of said
> license.

They are the owner of a copy of copyrighted material as soon as they are
sold that copy from the previous onwer, and usually it is not the owner
of the copyright.

The copy of copyrighted material does come with a post-sale shrink-wrap
license, but there is not legal precedent that says a shrink-wrap
license can change the conditions of sale of a copy of copyrighted
material.

>> EULA is so loop hole infested ....
>>
>
> Name one. Better yet, name a single court decision that invalidates
> the EULA.

Actually, there isn't one that has invalidated a whole shrink-wrap
license, but specific terms have been found unconscionable. Check out
Klocek v. Gateway.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 4:04:35 PM

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

kurttrail wrote:

>>Name one. Better yet, name a single court decision that invalidates
>>the EULA.
>
>
> Actually, there isn't one that has invalidated a whole shrink-wrap
> license,



Again, we agree on something. How unusual. Thanks for starting to see
the light. There's hope for you, yet.



> but specific terms have been found unconscionable. Check out
> Klocek v. Gateway.
>


Granted, an "unconscionable contract can be invalidated by a court, but
I don't see how you could possibly misinterpret Gateway's business
practice/license regarding support to being pertinent to the question at
hand. Got any court cases that actually address the subject under
discussion?



--

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
September 17, 2005 4:34:16 PM

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

Bruce Chambers wrote:

> Jonah wrote:
>
>>
>> Carey I have changed a faulty MOBO several times in the past for
>> clients and got the OEM re-activated after calling M$ and explaining,
>> never had a problem. Presumably this is at M$ discretion but if I can
>> get a new MOBO fitted and activated I can then change all the other
>> components over a several months and end up with a "New" PC with the
>> OEM from a totally different PC?
>> Actually I have done just that with one of mine, the only original
>> component now is the front USB slot and its not connected. Changes
>> started with the MOBO, M$ re-activated it for me and went on for about
>> 8 months. Still on its original SP1 OEM Installation and it validates.
>> OK its the only PC I know of out of the hundreds I fix which is
>> entirely different from its original spec but there must be more.
>>
>> Jonah
>>
>>
>
>
> According to its EULA, an OEM license may not be transferred from
> one distinct PC to another PC. Nothing is said about prohibiting one
> from repairing or upgrading the PC on which an OEM license is installed.
>
> Now, some people believe that the motherboard is the key component
> that defines the "original computer," but the OEM EULA does not make any
> such distinction. Others have said that one could successfully argue
> that it's the PC's case that is the deciding component, as that is where
> one is instructed to affix the OEM CoA label w/Product Key. Again, the
> EULA does not specifically define any single component as the computer.
> Licensed Microsoft Systems Builders, who are allowed to distribute OEM
> licenses with computers they sell, are contractually obligated to
> "define" the computer as the motherboard, but this limitation/definition
> can't be applied to the end user until the EULA is re-written. This is
> the catch that has caught the OP: the computer manufacturer has to treat
> the repaired/upgraded computer as a different computer. Had the OP
> obtained the replacement motherboard from the original manufacturer,
> this issue wouldn't have arisen.
>
> Microsoft has, to date, been very careful _not_ publicly to define
> when an incrementally upgraded computer ceases to be the original
> computer. The closest I've ever seen a Microsoft employee come to this
> definition (in a public forum) is to tell the person making the inquiry
> to consult the PC's manufacturer. As the OEM license's support is
> solely the responsibility of said manufacturer, they should determine
> what sort of hardware changes to allow before the warranty and support
> agreements are voided. To paraphrase: An incrementally upgraded
> computer ceases to be the original computer, as pertains to the OEM
> EULA, only when the *OEM* says it's a different computer. If you've
> built the system yourself, and used a generic OEM CD, then _you_ are the
> "OEM," and _you_ get to decide when you'll no longer support your product.

Bruce, Excellent! It has always been this way or the way
it has evolved, as far back as I can remember and that is
around 20 years.
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 6:31:33 PM

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

Bruce Chambers wrote:
> kurttrail wrote:
>
>>> Name one. Better yet, name a single court decision that invalidates
>>> the EULA.
>>
>> Actually, there isn't one that has invalidated a whole shrink-wrap
>> license,
>
> Again, we agree on something. How unusual. Thanks for starting to
> see the light. There's hope for you, yet.

I don't believe I've claimed that the entire shrink-wrap license in
unconscionable, just certain terms mainly as they pertain to private
non-commercial use.

>> but specific terms have been found unconscionable. Check out
>> Klocek v. Gateway.
>
> Granted, an "unconscionable contract can be invalidated by a court,
> but I don't see how you could possibly misinterpret Gateway's business
> practice/license regarding support to being pertinent to the question
> at hand. Got any court cases that actually address the subject under
> discussion?

Nope. But that goes both ways. Neither do you have any case that
upholds private non-commercial use shrink-wrap license terms on
copyrighted material.

I believe that an individual's rights under the law trump any post-sale
shrink-wrap license terms that tries to limit that individuals private
non-commercial use in their home. And until proven otherwise, I have
ever right to follow my opinion over that of you, MS, the BSA, and the
entire lobby of the corporate copyright elite.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
September 17, 2005 9:54:54 PM

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

"Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote
>
> Name one. Better yet, name a single court decision that invalidates the
> EULA.
>
>
> --
>
> Bruce Chambers

Can you name a single court decision that validates it in regards to an end
user who bought a generic OEM?

Alias
Anonymous
September 17, 2005 9:54:55 PM

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

Alias wrote:

>
>
> Can you name a single court decision that validates it in regards to an end
> user who bought a generic OEM?
>
> Alias
>
>


` Certainly. Both I and your hero Kurttrail have done so repeatedly.

Procd, Inc. v. Zeidenberg
http://www.law.emory.edu/7circuit/june96/96-1139.html


--

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
September 17, 2005 9:54:56 PM

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

Bruce Chambers wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>
>> Can you name a single court decision that validates it in regards to
>> an end user who bought a generic OEM?
>
> ` Certainly. Both I and your hero Kurttrail have done so repeatedly.
>
> Procd, Inc. v. Zeidenberg
> http://www.law.emory.edu/7circuit/june96/96-1139.html

1.) The material in question wasn't copyrighted material, but a
database not covered under copyright law.

2.) The EULA terms in question were about commercial uses, namely
repackaging the database and selling it.

So try again, Bruce.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
September 17, 2005 10:41:19 PM

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

"Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote

> Alias wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Can you name a single court decision that validates it in regards to an
>> end user who bought a generic OEM?
>>
>> Alias
>
>
> ` Certainly. Both I and your hero Kurttrail have done so repeatedly.

Kurt is not my hero. He makes some good points and he makes some bad points
just like you. Many of your posts, btw, have been very helpful to me.

> Procd, Inc. v. Zeidenberg
> http://www.law.emory.edu/7circuit/june96/96-1139.html
>

1996? LOL! Win95 just came out. Show me a case that validates an XP OS EULA
and in regards to an end user who has bought a generic OEM.

Alias
>
> --
>
> 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
September 17, 2005 10:41:20 PM

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

Alias wrote:
>
>
> 1996? LOL! Win95 just came out. Show me a case that validates an XP OS EULA
> and in regards to an end user who has bought a generic OEM.
>


That's right, 1996. And in all of the time since then, the decision
has not been overturned. It hasn't even been seriously challenged, to
the best of my knowledge. That pretty much proves my point, I'd say.

And you've never heard of the concept of legal precedent,
apparently? The case clearly establishes that shrink-wrapped EULAs,
until and unless *individually* proven invalid for cause, are
enforceable contracts. No distinction is made to even hint that OEM
EULAs are any different.


--

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
September 17, 2005 11:46:01 PM

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

That court case you people are talking about is for a Business not a
home user.

I really do not like xp eula. anyhow. Most places with a contract-you
can negotiate and say no before the sell take place. Microsoft you
can not.


If you want something the real violates the eula and you even have to
pay for it called http://www.litepc.com/




Greg Ro
September 18, 2005 3:20:06 AM

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

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 09:42:43 -0600, Bruce Chambers
<bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote:

snip
>
> According to its EULA, an OEM license may not be transferred from
>one distinct PC to another PC. Nothing is said about prohibiting one
>from repairing or upgrading the PC on which an OEM license is installed.
>
> Now, some people believe that the motherboard is the key component
>that defines the "original computer," but the OEM EULA does not make any
>such distinction. Others have said that one could successfully argue
>that it's the PC's case that is the deciding component, as that is where
>one is instructed to affix the OEM CoA label w/Product Key. Again, the
>EULA does not specifically define any single component as the computer.
> Licensed Microsoft Systems Builders, who are allowed to distribute OEM
>licenses with computers they sell, are contractually obligated to
>"define" the computer as the motherboard, but this limitation/definition
>can't be applied to the end user until the EULA is re-written. This is
>the catch that has caught the OP: the computer manufacturer has to treat
>the repaired/upgraded computer as a different computer. Had the OP
>obtained the replacement motherboard from the original manufacturer,
>this issue wouldn't have arisen.
>
> Microsoft has, to date, been very careful _not_ publicly to define
>when an incrementally upgraded computer ceases to be the original
>computer. The closest I've ever seen a Microsoft employee come to this
>definition (in a public forum) is to tell the person making the inquiry
>to consult the PC's manufacturer. As the OEM license's support is
>solely the responsibility of said manufacturer, they should determine
>what sort of hardware changes to allow before the warranty and support
>agreements are voided. To paraphrase: An incrementally upgraded
>computer ceases to be the original computer, as pertains to the OEM
>EULA, only when the *OEM* says it's a different computer. If you've
>built the system yourself, and used a generic OEM CD, then _you_ are the
>"OEM," and _you_ get to decide when you'll no longer support your product.

Bruce, that just about covers the issue as far as I am concerned. I AM
the OEM...........Nice!............. much appreciated post.

Thanks a lot

Jonah
Anonymous
September 18, 2005 4:30:47 PM

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

"Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message
news:usk2k85uFHA.2328@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Winux P wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> If over the phone activation is required, you tell the lovely PA person,
>> you're activing this copy of XP again cause your rebuilding after a
>> corrupted system, like severe damage by a virus or something.
>
>
> So, it's your presumption that the OP should be as totally lacking in
> integrity as you, and should be willing to lie? Granted, it's a sad
> world, but not everyone has yet sunk to your level.

I'm trying to pull you out from the drain pipe Bruce, at least onto the
gutter.

>
>
>>It's your WinXP, you paid for it, the decision is yours.
>
>
> Ah, proof of concept! An outright lie. We all know perfectly well that
> WinXP does not belong to the OP. It's intellectual property that belongs
> to its creator.

They can keep the IP. I'll keep the right of use at my discretion.

> The only thing the OP ever purchased was a license to use the product in
> accordance with the terms of said license.

Upon agreement

>
>
>
>> EULA is so loop hole infested ....
>>
>
>
> Name one. Better yet, name a single court decision that invalidates the
> EULA.

Name one. - It's prematurally called an agreement.

I'm waiting for a court to validate it.

>
>
> --
>
> 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

- Winux P
!