Re: ATTN an MVP that is against the MS EUA

From: Jupiter Jones [MVP] (jones_jupiter_at_hotnomail.com)
Date: 02/03/05 

Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 22:10:48 -0700

As I thought, you will not answer with a simple yes or no.

"I'll your question, once you answer mine."
Reminiscent of a childhood game. 

-- 
Jupiter Jones  [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message 
news:%23ZLeozaCFHA.3924@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
>
>> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
>> Somehow I knew you would not answer that Yes or No question.
>
> And let's not forget you trying to compare a civil offense with a criminal 
> one by changing the subject with your question to begin with!
>
>>
>> Let me rephrase:
>> As the EULA is written, was it the intent of Microsoft that the buyer
>> be entitled to install Windows on more than one computer at the same
>> time?
>
> I'll your question, once you answer mine.
>
> Here it is:
>
> Is everything written in a contract legally enforceable just because both 
> mutually agreed to?
>
>> Forget all your copyright junk.
>
> Quoting the Supreme Court is "copyright junk."  ROFL!
>
>> Some is not relevant and is only posted so you could divert you
>> answer.
>
> All of it is relevant, as what I quoted, with the exception of your use of 
> the word "it," is directly quoted from Supreme Court rulings!  MS doesn't 
> possess the exclusive right to limit an individuals "fair use." So while 
> MS may have the intention to limit an individual to install MS software on 
> only one computer through their EULA, it really doesn't legally possess 
> the right to do so.
>
> And I believe that MS's EULA is a legally valid commercial use contract, 
> but they have yet to legally prove that they have the right to dispossess 
> individuals of their "fair use" rights through a post-sale shrinkwrap 
> license.
>
> And in case you didn't notice it, I did kinda end up answering your 
> question in this last section in a round about way.  MS has no intent in 
> their Windows XP EULA to allow the buyer to install on more then one 
> computer at the same time, but that does not mean that MS has the LEGAL 
> RIGHT to limit individuals to install Windows XP on only one computer at a 
> time.  And to convince me otherwise, MS would have to sue me and win!
>
> From Brucey Chumpers favorite web site on Fair Use:
>
> "Unfortunately, if the copyright owner disagrees with your fair use 
> interpretation, the dispute will have to be resolved by courts or 
> arbitration." - 
> http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/index.html
>
> So my interpretation of "fair use" as I understand it though the SUPREME 
> COURT stating, "Any individual may reproduce a copyrighted work for a 
> "fair use"; the copyright owner does not possess the exclusive right to 
> such a use," stands for me, at the very least, until the copyright owner, 
> in this case Microsoft, sues me and wins in court or through arbitration! 
> And believe me, if the time ever happens where I'm sued over my 
> interpretation of "fair use," I fully intend to fight for my 
> interpretation to the bitter end.
>
> -- 
> Peace!
> Kurt
> Self-anointed Moderator
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Legality of OEM Win XP 1-2 CPU
    ... The copyright owner doesn't get to decide what is & is not a "fair use." ... the Supreme Court emphasized this first factor as being ... ultimate aim is, by this incentive, to stimulate artistic creativity for ... LOL! ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: "Fair Use"
    ... The people think the Constitution protects their rights; But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome. ... | The copyright owner doesn't get to decide what is & is not a "fair use." ... The Supreme Court in 1984, when considering the taping of entire | movies on a VCR already concluded that individuals can copy an entire | copyrighted work as a "fair use." ... But the | ultimate aim is, by this incentive, to stimulate artistic creativity for | the general public good. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • "Fair Use"
    ... The copyright owner doesn't get to decide what is & is not a "fair use." ... the purpose and character of your use ... The Supreme Court in 1984, when considering the taping of entire ... ultimate aim is, by this incentive, to stimulate artistic creativity for ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Legality of OEM Win XP 1-2 CPU
    ... >>Where in this statement do you see the Supreme Court limiting the ... > of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or ... Non-existent since copyright owner was paid for the original copy by the ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)