Re: Valid Product Keys for Windows XP SP2 Professional Volume License Edition


"Nina DiBoy" <nin@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ej5cv1$3uh$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Gregg Hill wrote:
"Alias" <aka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ONUB35bBHHA.4348@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<snip>
No, I don't see the difference,
What a surprise.

because there is none. You just stated that
again when you said, "I don't think it's right to take something that
belongs to someone else."
Um, how can I take something I already have?


Because what you "have" is ONE license for ONE computer. If you install
it on MULTIPLE computers, you have taken a license that does not belong
to you. You do NOT "have" multiple licenses.

Actually I have a physical CD which is not a license.

<snip>
No, can't take something I already have and contract disputes are not
crimes.


Typical of you to reply to only a portion of my comment before the point
was made about it being a single license.

If you install your single license on MULTIPLE computers, you have taken
a license that does not belong to you.

Nope, one would not be taking anything from MS. If one was making copies
and selling them with the key without being a reseller, that would be
stealing.


Using that line of thinking, if I buy one TV from a store, then take 90 more
and give them to my friends without being paid anything for them, I am not
stealing. Interesting.

Your statement is incorrect and should read, "If one were making copies and
**distributing them** with the key without being a reseller **or under any
other circumstances,** that would be stealing." Anyone who uses it without a
vlaid license is in effect stealing it.

In principal, it is no different than walking into a computer store and
buying one XP package, then stuffing 30 more into a bag, walking out the
door, and giving them to anyone who wants one. You paid for one license, but
you took 30 others to distribute. Whether for profit or not, it is
unethical, even if it is not illegal.

Would you do that? Why not? The end result is the same. One was purchased,
the rest were stolen.





Name one court case where in any person using software for non-commercial
purposes in the privacy of their own home not strictly in line with the
license has been taken to court and lost.



I have said over and over again that a law need not exist to make something
wrong. To site a Biblical example (not to thump a Bible, but just to prove a
point), when Cain killed Abel, there were no lasws against murder. Was it OK
to kill his brother, then?







It does not have to be a crime to be stealing, or in your words, taking
"...something that belongs to someone else." The additional installations
you do on your other computers are taking a license from Microsoft,
because the ONE license you bought and now "have" only covers ONE
installation. Any installations beyond that ONE are taking from
Microsoft.

Taking what from MS?






You do not "have" multiple licenses. You admited that it would be a
contract dispute. Why would it be? Duh, because YOU are violating the
contract you have with Microsoft if you install it on more than one
computer.

It's not technically a contract dispute until MS takes one to courrt over
it.


If I sign a contract and go against it, but the person wronged decides not
to pursue it, I have still breached my agreement. I would still be
unethical. The person wronged does not have to prove my lack of ethics in
court for it to be an unethical act.



So, again, you are taking something that does not belong to you. You are
stealing. And again, so you can comprehend the concept, it does not have
to be illegal, a crime, or whatever term you choose to give it in order
for it to be unethical, immoral, and stealing, regardless of where you
live. If Microsoft is not being paid each time that XP gets installed on
a separate computer, then it is not fair to them, and by definition is
NOT "fair use." Your unethical country's interpretation of "fair use" is
flawed. Something that is "fair" has to benefit BOTH parties involved in
order to meet the definition of fairness, which software piracy (copying)
does not do.

Once again, yes, you DO advocate taking something that does not belong to
you, by advocating that it is OK to install licenses which you do not
"have." What you "have" is a single license to use the software on ONE
computer. ANY use beyond that is taking "something that belongs to
someone else."

Gregg

<Snip>

No, I advocate that the EULA from MS for windows is unconscionable.

Then you should not agree to it, then renege on your word. You should avoid
the product and use only other manufacturers' software.





No shady company like MS has the right to infringe on my fair use rights
or to tell me how to use something I own in the privacy of my own home.

Actually, they have every right. They developed the software. If you feel
they have no right, you should not use the product. Why do your "fair use
rights" overrule those of the people who put in the time to write the
product? Because you are unethical.

Gregg


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Valid Product Keys for Windows XP SP2 Professional Volume License Edition
    ... Please tell me what you consider to be stealing. ... break the End User License Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is ... something that belongs to someone else. ... That agreement gives you permission to install ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Valid Product Keys for Windows XP SP2 Professional Volume License Edition
    ... Typical of you to reply to only a portion of my comment before the point was made about it being a single license. ... If you install your single license on MULTIPLE computers, you have taken a license that does not belong to you. ... stealing, or in your words, taking "...something that belongs to someone else." ... because YOU are violating the contract you have with Microsoft if you install it on more than one computer. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Valid Product Keys for Windows XP SP2 Professional Volume License Edition
    ... break the End User License Agreement, regardless of whether or not it ... It is an agreement between the ... something that belongs to someone else. ... permission to install the software on ONE computer. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Valid Product Keys for Windows XP SP2 Professional Volume License Edition
    ... You can rationalize all you want, but if you do that in this case, you break the End User License Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is legally binding in your country. ... not steal either, even though I would not have had any serious legal consequences because, like you, I don't think it's right to take something that belongs to someone else. ... That agreement gives you permission to install the software on ONE computer. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: OK --- a question of ethics
    ... >> So you advocate stealing. ... I have not read the license, ... >> few hundred and I would bet is says INSTALL not USE CONCURRENTLY. ... > the numerous p2p networks paying nothing to the developer, ...
    (alt.sys.pc-clone.dell)
Loading