Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III
From: kurttrail (dontemailme_at_anywhereintheknowuniverse.org)
Date: 02/02/05
- Next message: Yves Leclerc: "Re: Widescreen problem"
- Previous message: Greg R : "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Next in thread: Michael: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Reply: Michael: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Reply: Michael: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 09:08:24 -0500
Leythos wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 11:29:55 +0100, Alias wrote:
>> I agree with Woody. Kurtis' views are refreshing compared to the "MS
>> said it. I believe it and that settles it" toadyism of some of the
>> MVPs.
>
> I've been on Usenet since the early 80's and find that Kurt and the
> people like him are what we call Trolls. They have a point, but, once
> they've said it they can't stop and they never address the facts part
> of a issue, they always divert from the issue when backed into a
> corner. That's why I plonked his main posting ID.
>
> The only valid part of anything that he's posted is that Users can
> install Win XP more than once and get away with it until MS does
> something to home user pirates.
>
> The vendors license is clear, and so is the section of TITLE that he
> spouts - one install per license,
It says no such thing
Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117: Limitations on exclusive rights:
Computer programs
(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.
How does a law that allows ADDITIONAL Adaptations/Installations say
anything one install per license. Hell, it doesn't even mention
"license" at all.
> backup copies are permitted as long
> as they are only used for backup of the media, not to be installed at
> the same time on any other computer/system.
>
> What his diatribe comes down to is that he doesn't like a vendor
> forcing him to have to pay for software beyond the first copy and he
> will make sure that everyone knows they can pirate additional copies
> even if it violates the license agreement. In reality he's just
> advocating simple theft, as use without purchase or approval by the
> vendor takes money from the vendor and is theft to most reasonable
> people in the world.
>
> If you want refreshing, switch to another OS where you are not
> limited by a restrictive EULA.
>
> If you read the EULA and even look at Kurts posting of that Title,
> it's clear that installing unlicensed copies is a direct violation of
> the vendors EULA. I see no difference in his willful disregard
> violation of a MS EULA and any other vendors EULA.
Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117 Is a limitation on the rights of the
software copyright owner, and a protection from infringement of the
owner of a copy of software. Saying that it doesn't allow installing
additional copies is a pure perversion of it's meaning!
-- Peace! Kurt Self-anointed Moderator microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea http://microscum.com "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron! "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
- Next message: Yves Leclerc: "Re: Widescreen problem"
- Previous message: Greg R : "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Next in thread: Michael: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Reply: Michael: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Reply: Michael: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
