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

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

Gregg Hill wrote:
"Nina DiBoy" <nin@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:ej5vt8$p79$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Gregg Hill wrote:
"Nina DiBoy" <nin@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:ej5nc6$480$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<snip>
It does not have to be a physical item to be stolen. If I hack into your bank account and transfer the balance to mine, I think you would be outraged, in spite of the fact that no physical item was taken from you.

Again, comparing apples to oranges. Stealing money is against the law. A contract dispute is not against the law.


My comment was in response to you stating, "Not an applicable comparison. TVs are a physical item. A license is not a physical item." You conveniently snipped that before you replied. My point was that it does not have to be a physical item in order for it to be stolen.

This is correct. MS proves that with all of their IP theft.


"Stealing money is against the law." Duh, but what you fail to comprehaend is that the effect on the manufacturer of someone buying one license and installing it ten times

Who says I've done that?

is the same as if that person had walked into a bank (or hacked in electronically) and taken money out of the manufacturer's bank account in an amount equal to nine licenses. To the manufacturer, it is stealing the money that they had a right to earn for developing the software.

What is it called when one purchases an OS, installs it, then one of the many peices of buggy DRM breaks and locks that person out of the OS?


And to say it one more time, it does not have to be against the law in order for it to be unethical.

Noone is going to look out for me except me. Having the care to stand up for my fair use rights is not unethical.

<snip>
Theft is theft. If you use something without the right to do so and against the agreement which you acknowledged, it is an accurate comparison.
I "acknowledged" the EULA, but did not agree to it. I wish MS would acknowledge fair use rights and not infringe on them.


And Microsoft wishes pirates would acknowledge that MS has the right to be compensated for each license in use.


If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

<snip>
The point was not to compare murder to what you claim to be "fair use" rights. The point was that there does not have to be a law against something to make it unethical, immoral, or stealing.

But it's still not a realistic comparison.


It was not a comparison. It was an example to show you that something can still be unethical and wrong without a law stating it is so.


This is not a discussion on ethics. This is a discussion on the EULA

<snip>

Nope. You AGREED to the EULA. HONOR IT or sotop using the product. Stop being a liar.


If one agrees to something, then reneges on that agreement, in my book, that makes one a liar.



So how does that make me a liar?


I have not once resorted to calling you names or insulting you. Who's the ethical one now?

<snip>

.

Relevant Pages