Re: Installing new motherboard

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

From: Leythos (void_at_nowhere.lan)
Date: 02/28/05 

Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:18:00 GMT

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 16:05:45 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
[snip]
> It's not a matter of which way *I* want it. I'm not arguing for
> any particular interpretation of the EULA, only that it's not so
> clear what interpretation is correct.
>
> By the way, over and above your two interpreatations, I can
> conceive of at least three other possible ones that a court might
> possibly agree with:
>
> 1. The computer is the CPU
>
> 2. The computer is the hard drive, since that's where Windows is
> installed
>
> 3. Silly as it may sound, the computer is defined by the case,
> since that's where Microsoft requires that the product key
> sticker be affixed.

Tom's going hate me for agreeing with you, but I didn't want to drag it
down to that many different levels :) In the old days I use to design
motherboards for Z80 and 8085 based computers, so my view is a little
different than some. Today I see the computer as being defined by the
motherboard myself (even before reading MS's OEM information) as it's the
one determining factor in what can be installed IN/With a computer - no
matter the OS or external hardware.

> My personal view is that I wish Microsoft would rewrite the OEM
> EULA to clarify exactly what "the computer" means. I think they
> would do both themselves and their customers a service by doing
> this.
>
> Alternatively, and even better, I'd like to see the whole
> category of OEM licenses disappear, and have all licenses the
> same.

I agree with your position - it would be nice to see MS make a blanket
agreement that Windows can be installed on as many personal computers as
own OWNS in a single residence per license. So a single purchase would be
good for any number of computers owned by a person and residing in a
single residence. Of course people would complain about that too, but it
would allow home users to have one license for all their computers in
their homes - now, I suppose it could also mean that if the Parent owned 4
computers and a daughter bough her own, that she would have to purchase
her own license for her personal computer..... It would never settle the
complaints of everyone, anything short of it being free for anyone to use
anywhere without any restrictions will always generate someone complaining
about licensing. 

-- 
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Installing new motherboard
    ... >> any particular interpretation of the EULA, ... > as own OWNS in a single residence per license. ... Of course people would complain ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: BK kernel workflow
    ... Linus, what happened to the early promises, that the data wouldn't be ... Some people complain about that, ... You can play this game with every license, if a licence had no conditions ... One of these consequences is that you cannot convert that repository on ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: is there really no good gui builder
    ... they have no such right to interpret the GPL this way; ... for development of "Open Source software governed by the GNU General ... Public License versions 2 and 3". ... readers to make such a false interpretation. ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: [Trolls} Received the holy grail and are silent (Disclosure)
    ... What ATF license is required? ... interpretation has force of law, ... Just like the DOT. ... claimed you were legal based on _your_ interpretation of DOT regs, ...
    (rec.models.rockets)
  • Re: GPL weasels and the atheros stink
    ... You just need to remove the dual license and make the file GPL-only. ... "you cannot complain about X unless you also complain about Y" is just ... Then why aren't you complaining about Mr. Floeters code? ... using the side of the dual-license you don't like. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)