Re: Product Activation

Bruce Chambers wrote:
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?"

He compared it to breaking the speeding *law*.





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?

Dodging the issue does not a good argument make and shooting the messenger doesn't either.


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.

I don't need to prove it and MS is scared sh¡tless to try and show it isn't by taking *anyone* to court for violating their EULA. Instead, they inconvenience paying customers with their anti piracy crap.


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.

They may be irrelevant to you but not to many people who can think for themselves. You've just bought into the scam hook, line and sinker and think it's just the normal way to do things.

You've yet to demonstrate how any of this is "unconscionable," or even how Microsoft might be responsible for other vendors advertising copy.

All they would have to do is insist on Truth in Advertising for their MICROSOFT products. And they *can* insist but they prefer to keep the people in the dark as to what they are really selling because if the masses found out what they are actually doing, they would have second thoughts about continuing with Windows.



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.

Again, moron, they made BILLIONS AND BILLIONS without a crappy anti piracy program that is flawed and cracked before it even comes out, and, in so doing, they cornered the PC Desktop market. IOW, if someone wants to install XP or Vista on multiple computers, all they have to do is call their friendly pirate who will gladly sell it to them cheaper than MS ever will.

Think of MS as a drug pusher. Once they get everyone hooked, they really start to charge the sh¡t out of them. Get the unconscionable part yet or are you too freaking strung out?

--
Alias
To email me, remove shoes
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Shrink Wrap my EULA ?
    ... >> You may refuse to accept it and the install will be cancelled. ... >>> You have the right to refuse the EULA. ... >>> permits you as a party to the contract to refuse the terms of such. ... >>> you wanted an OEM version that included all the license documentation, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Shrink Wrap my EULA ?
    ... > You may refuse to accept it and the install will be cancelled. ... >> You have the right to refuse the EULA. ... >> permits you as a party to the contract to refuse the terms of such. ... and other materials in the OEM package then you need to ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Shrink Wrap my EULA ?
    ... Your right to decline the EULA also occurs during install - that is why we ... You may refuse to accept it and the install will be cancelled. ... > you as a party to the contract to refuse the terms of such. ... and other materials in the OEM package then you need to ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • 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. ... 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. ... 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: XP or 2000? ... Really about Kurt trolling the group
    ... > whether or not any contract, in any single instance, is enforceable. ... The EULA states very clearly ... >> when you install the software for the first time. ... >> you heard of people getting sued for breach of contract? ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)