Re: MS Licensing
From: *Vanguard* (no-email_at_reply-to-newsgroup.invalid)
Date: 05/16/04
- Next message: *Vanguard*: "Re: MS Licensing"
- Previous message: GBH: "Re: MS Licensing"
- In reply to: GBH: "Re: MS Licensing"
- Next in thread: Alex Nichol: "Re: MS Licensing"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 16 May 2004 15:07:20 -0500
GBH said in news:mqPpc.124$JL5.121@newsfe1-win:
> Thanks for explaining that. If I understand correctly then if the
> machine has a sticker it is OEM and not transferable; machines
> without stickers are presumably retail purchases and these are
> transferable (in the event of the original machine being trashed). I
> am new to this particular company and am trying to audit all the
> hardware and software but its not easy due to the way equipment and
> licenses had been purchased.
You might consider upgrading the hardware in those computers having the
OEM installs of Windows. The license says usage is restricted to one
computer. It does not prohibit you from upgrading its components, like
the hard drive. From what I've read of the EULA, I can't see that it
even bans the exchange of a motherboard. After all, motherboards do go
bad even when new and have to be replaced. However, if the old cases
are for AT motherboards then you won't be able to get newer ATX
motherboards and power supplies. But then, does the EULA stop you from
replacing the metal case used to house the motherboard and drives?
The definition of "one computer" is very hazy. Computers go bad, so
much so that they sometimes have to be wholly replaced, like after a
massive power surge. The license does not ban you from fixing your
hardware. I also do not believe it bans you from upgrading it. Who
would buy anything from Microsoft if you could never ever add another
hard drive or replace the existing one with a larger drive, or add
memory or take out the old memory to get higher capacity sticks, or
replace your PSU because it broke or cannot handle the extra load from
added hard drives, or you wanted to add a DVD/RW drive, or replace your
motherboard after a surge, or get a faster CPU or replace a bad one, or
replace a [defective] motherboard? Think more along the lines as that
license goes with that *host* for whatever it is or ever becomes.
Windows is flaky enough but there would be no way anyone would ever use
it if, for example, the floppy drive went bad and replacing it nullified
their license, or they had an old 5.25" floppy and wanted to replace it
with a 3.5" floppy.
Their license does not bar repairs and upgrades. Their license also
does not provide boundary checks or limits to repairs and upgrades. The
OEM EULA (mine) says:
"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 HARDWARE" does not dictate that it must remain static and can never
change. Otherwise, you could never replace that fried CPU because the
heatsink fell off leaving you with a forever dead computer simply
because replacing the CPU would violate your EULA, or you would have to
buy a new OEM version everytime you replaced a defective component or
wanted to upgrade. Nothing in the EULA bars the "computer" from
evolving or mutating. If you discard that host then the license goes
with it. The definition of "computer" and "hardware" is so vague that,
according to it, you could by a screw as the "hardware" for the
"computer system component" and tape it inside whatever host you install
the OEM version of Windows. Yeah, this is stretching it a bit, but just
one little paragraph leaves interpretation wide open.
I've seen lots of legit dealers selling OEM versions of Windows and
abiding by the "must be accompanied by hardware" requirement by selling
it with an IDE or SATA cable or even just a power cord. Per the second
clause of Microsoft's definition, I can take that OEM copy of Windows to
whatever system I move the IDE cable to that was purchased with OEM
Windows to meet the hardware requirement; that is, "the computer system
with which the hardware operates" would be any in which I can install
the IDE cable since "the HARDWARE is a computer system component" (the
IDE cable *is* a computer system component but it is not a major
computer *subsystem*). Since the contract doesn't preclude repairs and
upgrades, like getting a bigger drive, and since an IDE cable is pushing
the definition of a "computer system component", just migrate the hard
drive and then upgrade it. The idea is that you don't cheat Microsoft
out of licenses for *other* hosts and that the OEM license sticks with
THAT host whatever it is or becomes.
If "the HARDWARE" was an IDE cable, you're still allowed up upgrade it
from, say, a 40-wire to an 80-wire cable. If the OEM version of windows
came with a hard disk as "the HARDWARE", you are still allowed to
replace it for repair or even to upgrade it to get a bigger one. Both
the cable and drive as "computer system components" can be moved to
another system. You're allowed to replace a bad CPU or even to get a
faster one. You can take out that 128MB memory stick which was "the
HARDWARE" tied to the OEM version and upgrade to a 512MB memory stick.
Since repairs and upgrades are obviously recognized okay for these other
"computer system components", the same applies to repairing (i.e.,
replacing) or upgrading the motherboard. Everyone recognizes that you
are still allowed to repair and upgrade your one "computer" but taken to
the unbounded extreme (because the EULA has no bounds) means you can end
up with a whole new and significantly different computer - but you still
have just *one* host (that replaced the prior one through repetitive and
concurrent upgrades).
For users that buy pre-built hosts, the EULA as written makes some sense
(because they are not likely to replace the motherboards and probably
not even their CPUs). But for folks that build their own, the
definitions in the EULA are far too vague. And the EULA is the *only*
contract to which I've agreed, not some "additional" remarks perhaps
made on Microsoft's web site to clarify and further restrict their
EULAs. I think a lot of users are reading way too much into a single
tiny paragraph defining what is the "computer". There's what the
contract says. There's how you interpret what it means. And then
there's what you think the writer meant to say. Too many users are
basing their decision on that last interpretation and adding more
restrictions based on what they think Microsoft meant to say. Microsoft
doesn't mind the confusion as it makes for extra sales.
Just go by what the contract actually says. Don't read more into it or
you'll restrict yourself to the glee of the other party.
- Next message: *Vanguard*: "Re: MS Licensing"
- Previous message: GBH: "Re: MS Licensing"
- In reply to: GBH: "Re: MS Licensing"
- Next in thread: Alex Nichol: "Re: MS Licensing"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
