Re: OEM license

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 05:14:06 -0400, kurttrail wrote:

Michael Stevens wrote:

--Alias-- wrote:
Marian Gutu wrote:
"--Alias--" <not@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ebwIfF0uGHA.4880@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Marian Gutu wrote:
You cannot sell OEM Software.Period.
False.

The original Microsoft OEM operating system software cannot be
transferred to another computer.

Who said anything about transferring?


The OEM Licence is for sale only to System Builders, Resellers,
and Hardware Purchasers.
False.

All OEM software must be bundled with hardware
False.

The End User License Agreement (EULA) for OEM software, including
Windows XP, states that the software is licensed as a single
integrated product in connection with the hardware

Where I live, the only XPs available at retails chains are generic
OEMs and can be purchased with no hardware. I have bought three. All
three have passed WPA and WGA/N with flying colors.


when distributed to end users and distribution of OEM software to
other end users is a violation of the license agreement issued by
the manufacturer.
False.

Purchasers of these versions must agree not to violate the terms
of such distribution policies and to accept all liability for
compliance with end-user restrictions.
--
Marian Gutu
False.

MCP, MCSAs, MCSEs
Be nice, society already sucks!
YOU be nice. Your erroneous advice already sucks! I can buy as many
legit generic OEMs without hardware that I want and if I so choose
to sell what I buy, that is nobody's business but mine and the
purchaser. Alias

I guess you didn't read the EULA. I found it for you in plain
english [sic]: http://linuxadvocate.org/articles.php?p=1

Nice dodge. My EULA says nothing about XP needing to be bought with
hardware. Once installed, yes, legally, it cannot be transferred but
that's not the subject at hand. The subject is if I buy a generic OEM
XP without hardware, am I free to see that CD or not. I say, yes, I
am and it will not breach the EULA, especially being as the EULA
hasn't been agreed to before the sale.

Alias


May the Force be with you!
http://www.google.com
"qwerty" <torridtear@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:torridtear@xxxxxxxxx>>
wrote in message
news:1155075539.203097.291050@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
Well, if I were to use it myself, I may not have cared so deeply,
but > since I prefer a different OS, this one would only be sold
(since I've > got no friends that use it either, so only
strangers would be > considered for transfer). >
> P.S. Friends don't let friends use Windows.
>
> P.P.S. No offence.
>
> Irma Troll wrote:
>> qwerty wrote:
>> > Situation:
>> >
>> > A laptop was bought with XP preinstalled but not activated,
the EULA
>> > was not accepted, the hard drive was erased, a different
(superior) >> > operating system was installed, XP stickers were
removed from the case.
>> >
>> >
>> > Question:
>> >
>> > Is it legal to use this license key on a different computer,
if a >> > legally obtained install CD is present, but it was
already installed
>> > and the key it came with cannot be used to activate another
computer?
>> > Will it work with Pro edition, if original install was Home?
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>>
>> Legal? WGaF - Microsoft deserve to be shafted for their
distribution >> policy. Just go ahead and use it.
>> Irma
>

The OP is not the system builder, he is the end user of the
pre-activated OEM XP. It cannot be resold.

That might have been a EULA term that the OP didn't accept. Since the
OP rejected the EULA, I don't think the EULA's terms are applicable.

This story may be of interest:

http://clevescene.com/issues/2005-03-30/news/feature_print.html

...Zamos decided to request a return directly from Microsoft, which has
its own 30-day return policy.

...He sent his letter by certified mail, so he knows when it arrived.
But Microsoft conveniently waited 34 days to respond. He was denied.

...First he auctioned off the Office XP Pro for $112.50 on September
27. But when he went to sell the Windows software, his second auction
was taken down by a "Microsoft investigator," who accused him of
infringing on the company's copyright, according to the lawsuit.

...Still, Zamos felt justified. The software had never been opened, and
Microsoft had made a return impossible. He'd researched the company's
resale policy and understood himself to be a "qualified end user." But
he couldn't be fully aware of the licensing agreement, since it only
appears when the software is loaded.

...But Zamos made one mistake. He wasn't, in fact, a licensed
"qualified end user," because he'd never signed the agreement that
would allow him to resell his software. And he couldn't sign the
agreement until he loaded the software.

...He turned his mistake back on Microsoft, however, accusing it of
deceptive sales practices, since the agreement had essentially been
hidden from him. "How could I sign the agreement if I'd never opened
the software? It didn't make any sense," he says.

...The suit spiraled into a dizzying 37 filings. Every time Microsoft
filed a motion to dismiss his claims, Zamos would file more the very
next day. Not only did he force Microsoft to defend its accusations
against him, but the company was now forced to defend its own practices
as well.

...Finally, Zamos gave Microsoft the migraine it hadn't expected. He
requested a trial by jury, knowing that the company wouldn't want to
spend tens of thousands of dollars in legal bills just to snuff one kid
in Ohio. He was right. The lawyers said they'd drop their suit -- if
Zamos dropped his countersuit.

...But that wasn't good enough for Zamos, who'd wasted hours of his
time and $40 in Kinko's copies. He didn't want billions of dollars or a
new Ford Mustang. He wanted an apology and reimbursement for his copies.

...Meanwhile, the company's lawyers seemed to understand they'd created
a PR nightmare. "I got a call from Chudakoff in the early afternoon,
the day the story came out," says David Sr. "He was looking for my son,
and when I asked him what for, that cockroach said he couldn't discuss
the case with me, because it defies legal ethics. So I said, 'What
legal ethics?'"

...When Zamos finally talked to Chudakoff, his tone had changed. "He
was very complimentary," Zamos says. "He said he was impressed by my
pleadings. His flattery was ridiculous."

...Chudakoff offered him a chance to settle.


I don't know how this next one came out. It may be the part of the action
that led to Microsoft's $1.1 billion class-action settlement in California
recently:

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-983988.html

...Specifically, the suit, which was brought by Cathy Baker, claims
that Microsoft, Symantec, CompUSA, Best Buy and other unnamed retailers
don't allow people to read "shrink wrap" licenses--agreements printed
inside the box or incorporated into the software itself--before they
buy a product.

..."Defendants acted in concert and have concocted a scheme to sell
consumers in the state of California software licenses in retail stores
without allowing them to review the terms and conditions of such
software licenses prior to sale," Ira Rothken, Baker's lawyer, wrote in
the complaint.


.

Quantcast