Why Only On One PC?

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.htm

Hey Bruce.
There are places still in the U.S. the keep their doors unlocked. I
stopped using norton because of thier activation.

Others,
As far a choices. You cant walk into walmart or sears and buy a Linux
system preinstalled with a modem. (Or a least not in my area)

Linux will not run all windows program either.


Red hat does have an activation but is not required.

Greg R

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 06:58:33 -0600, "Bruce Chambers" wrote:

Greetings --

Let's put the responsibility where it lies, shall we? We
bonafide, honest customers are not inconvenienced by WPA. We're
inconvenienced by the acts of the software pirates who have made WPA
and other copy protection schemes necessary. Just as we
inconvenienced by having to lock our homes and cars to keep common
thieves out -- it's not the manufacturer of the locks and automobiles
who are the root cause of the inconvenience, it's the dishonesty of
others. Just as we resent having to pay taxes to keep convicted
criminals behind bars.


Bruce Chambers

Finally a reasonable post,
I never thought of that like that. A lot better the kurttrails post
even.

On 21 Jul 2004 19:39:28 GMT, ospam (DJS0302) wrote:


I like to compare owning a copy of Windows with owning a book. Both are
intellectual properties. It's illegal for me to make copies of either one and
sell them. The only difference is I don't have to buy multiple copies of the
same book for each room in my house.

But you can order a Lindows computer from Wal-Mart:
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/produ...A41937%3A96356
Yes, it has a modem.
So even at Wal-Mart there are CHOICES.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Greg R" wrote in message
As far a choices. You cant walk into walmart or sears and buy a
Linux
system preinstalled with a modem. (Or a least not in my area)

Linux will not run all windows program either.


Red hat does have an activation but is not required.

Greg R

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 06:58:33 -0600, "Bruce Chambers"
wrote:

Greetings --

Let's put the responsibility where it lies, shall we? We
bonafide, honest customers are not inconvenienced by WPA. We're
inconvenienced by the acts of the software pirates who have made
WPA
and other copy protection schemes necessary. Just as we
inconvenienced by having to lock our homes and cars to keep common
thieves out -- it's not the manufacturer of the locks and
automobiles
who are the root cause of the inconvenience, it's the dishonesty of
others. Just as we resent having to pay taxes to keep convicted
criminals behind bars.


Bruce Chambers

How does a book compare to Windows?
A book can not be used in more than one location at a time.
A book can not be copied so multiple users in different locations can
use at the same time.
Since you think this example is reasonable and comparable, you also
think the similar restrictions in the EULA are reasonable.
Remember...it was you that said "Finally a reasonable post..."

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Greg R" wrote in message
...
Finally a reasonable post,
I never thought of that like that. A lot better the kurttrails post
even.

On 21 Jul 2004 19:39:28 GMT, ospam (DJS0302) wrote:


I like to compare owning a copy of Windows with owning a book.
Both are
intellectual properties. It's illegal for me to make copies of
either one and
sell them. The only difference is I don't have to buy multiple
copies of the
same book for each room in my house.

You can copy one chapter of a book.

--=20
----------------------------------------------------------
'Not happy John! Defending our democracy',
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...392635123.html

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message =
...
How does a book compare to Windows?
A book can not be used in more than one location at a time.
A book can not be copied so multiple users in different locations can
use at the same time.
Since you think this example is reasonable and comparable, you also
think the similar restrictions in the EULA are reasonable.
Remember...it was you that said "Finally a reasonable post..."
=20
--=20
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
=20
=20
"Greg R" wrote in message
...
Finally a reasonable post,
I never thought of that like that. A lot better the kurttrails post
even.

On 21 Jul 2004 19:39:28 GMT, ospam (DJS0302) wrote:


I like to compare owning a copy of Windows with owning a book.
Both are
intellectual properties. It's illegal for me to make copies of
either one and
sell them. The only difference is I don't have to buy multiple
copies of the
same book for each room in my house.

=20

for reviews and such there are provisions to copy sections of books
for limited purposes.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"David Candy" wrote in message
...
You can copy one chapter of a book.

--
----------------------------------------------------------
'Not happy John! Defending our democracy',
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...392635123.html

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
How does a book compare to Windows?
A book can not be used in more than one location at a time.
A book can not be copied so multiple users in different locations
can
use at the same time.
Since you think this example is reasonable and comparable, you also
think the similar restrictions in the EULA are reasonable.
Remember...it was you that said "Finally a reasonable post..."

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Greg R" wrote in message
...
Finally a reasonable post,
I never thought of that like that. A lot better the kurttrails
post
even.

On 21 Jul 2004 19:39:28 GMT, ospam (DJS0302)
wrote:


I like to compare owning a copy of Windows with owning a book.
Both are
intellectual properties. It's illegal for me to make copies of
either one and
sell them. The only difference is I don't have to buy multiple
copies of the
same book for each room in my house.

I wonder if there is a time limit. Copy a chapter a day and don't put =
the chapters with each other.

--=20
----------------------------------------------------------
'Not happy John! Defending our democracy',
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...392635123.html

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message =
...
for reviews and such there are provisions to copy sections of books
for limited purposes.
=20
--=20
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
=20
=20
"David Candy" wrote in message
...
You can copy one chapter of a book.
=20
--=20
----------------------------------------------------------
'Not happy John! Defending our democracy',
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...392635123.html
=20
"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
How does a book compare to Windows?
A book can not be used in more than one location at a time.
A book can not be copied so multiple users in different locations
can
use at the same time.
Since you think this example is reasonable and comparable, you also
think the similar restrictions in the EULA are reasonable.
Remember...it was you that said "Finally a reasonable post..."

--=20
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Greg R" wrote in message
...
Finally a reasonable post,
I never thought of that like that. A lot better the kurttrails
post
even.

On 21 Jul 2004 19:39:28 GMT, ospam (DJS0302)
wrote:


I like to compare owning a copy of Windows with owning a book.
Both are
intellectual properties. It's illegal for me to make copies of
either one and
sell them. The only difference is I don't have to buy multiple
copies of the
same book for each room in my house.



=20

I am not familiar with copyright law but I think it also stipulates
the purpose of the copies.
I think the length is a % of the total.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"David Candy" wrote in message
...
I wonder if there is a time limit. Copy a chapter a day and don't put
the chapters with each other.

--
----------------------------------------------------------
'Not happy John! Defending our democracy',
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...392635123.html

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
for reviews and such there are provisions to copy sections of books
for limited purposes.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"David Candy" wrote in message
...
You can copy one chapter of a book.

--
----------------------------------------------------------
'Not happy John! Defending our democracy',
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...392635123.html

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
How does a book compare to Windows?
A book can not be used in more than one location at a time.
A book can not be copied so multiple users in different locations
can
use at the same time.
Since you think this example is reasonable and comparable, you
also
think the similar restrictions in the EULA are reasonable.
Remember...it was you that said "Finally a reasonable post..."

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Greg R" wrote in message
...
Finally a reasonable post,
I never thought of that like that. A lot better the kurttrails
post
even.

On 21 Jul 2004 19:39:28 GMT, ospam (DJS0302)
wrote:


I like to compare owning a copy of Windows with owning a book.
Both are
intellectual properties. It's illegal for me to make copies of
either one and
sell them. The only difference is I don't have to buy multiple
copies of the
same book for each room in my house.

Chapter for books, 10% for articles. And it's for review. But if you are =
reading a book is one not reviewing it? This is far more interesting =
than OEM software.

--=20
----------------------------------------------------------
'Not happy John! Defending our democracy',
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...392635123.html

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message =
...
I am not familiar with copyright law but I think it also stipulates
the purpose of the copies.
I think the length is a % of the total.
=20
--=20
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
=20
=20
"David Candy" wrote in message
...
I wonder if there is a time limit. Copy a chapter a day and don't put
the chapters with each other.
=20
--=20
----------------------------------------------------------
'Not happy John! Defending our democracy',
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...392635123.html
=20
"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
for reviews and such there are provisions to copy sections of books
for limited purposes.

--=20
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"David Candy" wrote in message
...
You can copy one chapter of a book.

--=20
----------------------------------------------------------
'Not happy John! Defending our democracy',
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...392635123.html

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message
...
How does a book compare to Windows?
A book can not be used in more than one location at a time.
A book can not be copied so multiple users in different locations
can
use at the same time.
Since you think this example is reasonable and comparable, you
also
think the similar restrictions in the EULA are reasonable.
Remember...it was you that said "Finally a reasonable post..."

--=20
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Greg R" wrote in message
...
Finally a reasonable post,
I never thought of that like that. A lot better the kurttrails
post
even.

On 21 Jul 2004 19:39:28 GMT, ospam (DJS0302)
wrote:


I like to compare owning a copy of Windows with owning a book.
Both are
intellectual properties. It's illegal for me to make copies of
either one and
sell them. The only difference is I don't have to buy multiple
copies of the
same book for each room in my house.





=20

our example is not really not all that bad.
Do you remove the book from one room before you take it to another
room?
Or do you copy the book so multiple users in various locations can
read it at the same time?

It's a lot easier to carry a book from room to room than it is to carry my
computer from room. Even worse would be if I had more than one computer and I
had to uninstall Windows from one machine and then install on different machine
every time I went from say the bedroom to the den.
I think it all comes down to degrees. Copying software or printed material to
sell for profit is wrong but I'm sure we've all copied stuff from books for our
own personal use even though they clearly state that no part of this
publication may be reproduced etc. , and I'm sure most of us have loaned a
friend a copy of a computer game to install on their computer even though most
EULA say you can't. However, if I had more than one computer and wanted to
install a particular piece of software on each one I wouldn't go out and buy a
copy for each computer. That's just wasteful.

No, it is not wistful unless you also equate wasteful with honest.
What does the specific EULA state?
Does it allow multiple installations?
Some do and some don't.
If not and you do it is theft and not waste.

Degrees is often just another excuse to justify theft.
Thieves use that excuse often.

Why is there a need to install a piece of software illegally on a
computer?
Or is it mostly a desire and being cheap?

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"DJS0302" wrote in message
news:20040721194838.04802.00000191@mb- It's a lot easier to carry a
book from room to room than it is to carry my
computer from room. Even worse would be if I had more than one
computer and I
had to uninstall Windows from one machine and then install on
different machine
every time I went from say the bedroom to the den.
I think it all comes down to degrees. Copying software or printed
material to
sell for profit is wrong but I'm sure we've all copied stuff from
books for our
own personal use even though they clearly state that no part of this
publication may be reproduced etc. , and I'm sure most of us have
loaned a
friend a copy of a computer game to install on their computer even
though most
EULA say you can't. However, if I had more than one computer and
wanted to
install a particular piece of software on each one I wouldn't go out
and buy a
copy for each computer. That's just wasteful.

Jupiter,
It has not be proven illegal. It is against the eula.
However, we don't know if the eula is legal either.

Greg R

..On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:18:46 -0600, "Jupiter Jones [MVP]"
wrote:

No, it is not wistful unless you also equate wasteful with honest.
What does the specific EULA state?
Does it allow multiple installations?
Some do and some don't.
If not and you do it is theft and not waste.

Degrees is often just another excuse to justify theft.
Thieves use that excuse often.

Why is there a need to install a piece of software illegally on a
computer?
Or is it mostly a desire and being cheap?

Greg don't even bother , as jj just said MS's eula is law and even
questioning it makes you a thief in their eyes .

"Woody" wrote in message
...
Greg don't even bother , as jj just said MS's eula is law and even
questioning it makes you a thief in their eyes .


DEAN D. PREGERSON United States District Judge Case No. CV 00-04161 DDP
(AJWx) :

The Court finds that the circumstances surrounding the transaction strongly
suggests that the transaction is in fact a sale rather than a license. For
example, the purchaser commonly obtains a single copy of the software, with
documentation, for a single price, which the purchaser pays at the time of
the transaction, and which constitutes the entire payment for the "license."
The license runs for an indefinite term without provisions for renewal. In
light of these indicia, many courts and commentators conclude that a
"shrinkwrap license" transaction is a sale of goods rather than a license.