Re: Product Activation

Alias wrote:
Bruce Chambers wrote:
Alias wrote:
Curt Christianson wrote:
The "law" says it's illegal to go 100 mph in a 30 mph zone...but I guess it's alright as long as I don't get caught!


Um, Redmond's EULA is *not* the Law.


Yes, we know. You're the *ONLY* one who seems to think someone is claiming otherwise. From whence does this delusion stem?

Read Curt's post.


And at no time did he say that the EULA is a law. Perhaps you should have read it, instead of trotting out one of your knee-jerk strawman "arguments?"




It's a document that high powered lawyers have drawn up which tell you what you *can't* do with Windows.


A freely entered into *contract*, in simpl terms.

No, a document whose only purpose is to state what you can't do with what you've bought.


What's the weather like, there in the state of denial?

Redmond has yet to go to court to legalize the scam because it's unconscionable and they know it.



You clearly don't have a clue, as you've repeatedly demonstrated, how contract law works. It is up to the supposedly aggrieved party (someone like yourself, say, who claims the contract is unfair) to take Microsoft to court and prove the contract unconscionable. No one has ever been able to do so, to date. Even when the US' Department of Justice and several state's Attorney's General were trying to sue Microsoft for monopolistic practices, not a single one of those highly politically-motivated lawyers even suggested that there might be anything wrong with the EULA? Why do you suppose that might be?

Anti trust suits and EULA scams are not the same thing, Bruce.

You call the EULA unconscionable; you prove it! Or just shut up about it.

The fact that they don't want you to install it on more than one computer for starters. The fact that ALL stores advertise that they sell software and, in reality, are selling licenses to use the software, aka bait and switch, is another. WPA & WGA are some more. Need I go on?



No, you've proven quite thoroughly that you haven't a rational argument and are only trying to change the subject by raising irrelevancies. You've yet to demonstrate how any of this is "unconscionable," or even how Microsoft might be responsible for other vendors advertising copy.


Now, don't trot out the "they are protecting their intellectual property" trip because, as you well know, MS made BILLIONS and BILLIONS with Win 9x, NT and W2K that didn't come with that baggage.


On the contrary, The EULAs for all of those products are pretty much identical when it comes to the number of installations permitted. If you'd ever read one, you'd know that. Why weren't those EULAs "unconscionable?" Why weren't you protesting them? Oh, I know! Microsoft finally took steps to enforce their long-standing licensing terms, and now you're put out because you no longer can easily install a single license on multiple computers.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Product Activation
    ... You clearly don't have a clue, as you've repeatedly demonstrated, how contract law works. ... It is up to the supposedly aggrieved party to take Microsoft to court and prove the contract unconscionable. ... Even when the US' Department of Justice and several state's Attorney's General were trying to sue Microsoft for monopolistic practices, not a single one of those highly politically-motivated lawyers even suggested that there might be anything wrong with the EULA? ... Microsoft finally took steps to enforce their long-standing licensing terms, and now you're put out because you no longer can easily install a single license on multiple computers. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: How many activiations with a stand alone copy
    ... I just did a search on Google, which took me to a Microsoft FAQ page. ... was I was trying to install the version of Outlook 2002 I got with my PDA, ... computers and she said yes, ... preinstalled on a new computer are single-computer licenses. ...
    (microsoft.public.outlook)
  • Re: WinXP Pro SP2 Full Retail Box
    ... You need to purchase a separate WinXP license for each computer on which you install it. ... The only way in which WinXP licensing differs from that of earlier versions of Windows is that Microsoft has finally added a copy protection and anti-theft mechanism, Product Activation, to prevent multiple installations using a single license. ... One can buy additional licenses, assuming one already has a retail license. ... Some Microsoft _application_ EULAs permit the licensed owner to install the product upon one desktop and one portable computer simultaneously, but this has *never* been true of *any* of Microsoft's operating systems' licenses. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: One copy of XP 2 computers
    ... Just install it on the other computer and get a crack from ... While what you heard is true of _some_ Microsoft applications ... You can, however, buy additional licenses, assuming you have a ... > Additional Licenses for Windows XP Home Edition ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
  • Re: multiple liscenses
    ... it EULA says that i can only install it on 1 computer. ... The only way in which WinXP licensing differs from that of earlier versions of Windows is that Microsoft has finally added a copy protection and anti-theft mechanism, Product Activation, to prevent multiple installations using a single license. ... One can buy additional licenses, assuming one already has a retail license. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers)