A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows XP » Windows XP Help and Support
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

using windows on two computers



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 27th 03, 05:06 PM
Rob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

Hi,
I have just purchased a full copy of win xp pro, and have a home network of
two computers. Can I use this one copy for both machines ?? I read somewhere
that for a small or home network it is ok to use the same copy of windows, I
dont want to go throught the install to find it wont activate and I have to
start again

Thanks in advance


Ads
  #2  
Old December 27th 03, 05:06 PM
PaulM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

Nope! You can not do that, you need two copies.

--
--------
Paul
--------
www.paulsxp.com
www.paulsxp.com/forums


"Rob" wrote in message ...
Hi,
I have just purchased a full copy of win xp pro, and have a home network

of
two computers. Can I use this one copy for both machines ?? I read

somewhere
that for a small or home network it is ok to use the same copy of windows,

I
dont want to go throught the install to find it wont activate and I have

to
start again

Thanks in advance




  #3  
Old December 27th 03, 05:06 PM
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

Rob;
What you read is wrong.
As with all consumer Microsoft OSs, one license, one computer.
If you want Windows XP on both computers, you need to buy a second
copy.
It is not relevant that you are home or business, small or large
network etc.
You will not be able to activate the second installation.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...oups/setup.asp
Please respond to newsgroup only for everyone's benefit.


"Rob" wrote in message
...
Hi,
I have just purchased a full copy of win xp pro, and have a home

network of
two computers. Can I use this one copy for both machines ?? I read

somewhere
that for a small or home network it is ok to use the same copy of

windows, I
dont want to go throught the install to find it wont activate and I

have to
start again

Thanks in advance



  #4  
Old December 27th 03, 05:06 PM
Bruce Chambers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

Greetings --

As it has *always* been with *all* Microsoft operating systems,
it's necessary (to be in compliance with both the EULA and copyright
laws, if not technically) to purchase one WinXP license for each
computer on which it is installed. 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 (or at least make more
difficult) the sort of multiple installations you're asking about.


Bruce Chambers

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

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"Rob" wrote in message
...
Hi,
I have just purchased a full copy of win xp pro, and have a home

network of
two computers. Can I use this one copy for both machines ?? I read

somewhere
that for a small or home network it is ok to use the same copy of

windows, I
dont want to go throught the install to find it wont activate and I

have to
start again

Thanks in advance




  #5  
Old December 27th 03, 05:42 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

You heard wrong!

"Rob" wrote in message ...
Hi,
I have just purchased a full copy of win xp pro, and have a home network

of
two computers. Can I use this one copy for both machines ?? I read

somewhere
that for a small or home network it is ok to use the same copy of windows,

I
dont want to go throught the install to find it wont activate and I have

to
start again

Thanks in advance




  #6  
Old December 27th 03, 05:44 PM
Cherry Qian
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

Hi Rob,

Thank you for the posting. As you indicated you want to install the same
copy of Windows XP Pro on two computers of your home network.

To answer your question. This is not recommended. To do so, you need to
get "Microsoft Windows XP Additional License"

Home Edition $89.10
Professional Edition $189

Under the Windows XP End-User License Agreement (EULA), you may install one
licensed copy of Windows XP on one computer. If you need to install Windows
XP on more than one computer that you own, you may qualify to purchase up
to three (3) discounted additional licenses in one of the following ways.

Purchase Online
==============

To provide a better product experience for our customers and immediate
access to additional licenses, Microsoft has partnered with participating
online retailers in the U.S. to allow you to purchase and use a Windows XP
license from the convenience of your home or small business. Here¡¯s how:

1. Enter either your current Windows XP Product ID or Product Key in the
boxes below, and then click Submit.
2. You¡¯ll learn whether you qualify for an additional license as well as
which license you qualify for--the full version or version upgrade.
3. Purchase your Windows XP Additional License Product Key for an
additional license directly from a Microsoft-approved reseller. A Product
Key is an electronic number that "unlocks" Windows XP and allows it to run.
4. After you purchase a Product Key, the key will be displayed on your
screen and you'll receive a confirmation e-mail message that also contains
the key

Purchase at a Retail Store
=======================

Microsoft has offered retailers in the U.S. and Canada the ability to sell
additional licenses at a discount. If you own a licensed copy of Windows
XP, and want to buy an additional license in packaged form, check with your
local retailer.

Purchase via Telephone
======================

Microsoft also offers an additional license service to customers who have
legally installed Windows XP and have an immediate need for an additional
license due to work stoppage or other unforeseen circumstance. In the U.S.
and Canada, call the Windows Product Activation Call Center at 888-571-2048
for more information on how you can take advantage of this service.

Hope the above information and suggestion helps and answers your question.
If anything is unclear, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Cherry Qian
MCSE2000, MCSA2000, MCDBA2000
Microsoft Partner Online Support


Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security

================================================== ==
When responding to posts, please Reply to Group via your newsreader so
that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
================================================== ==
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.

  #7  
Old December 27th 03, 05:45 PM
kurttrail
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers


-----Original Message-----
Greetings --

As it has *always* been with *all* Microsoft

operating systems,
it's necessary (to be in compliance with both the EULA

and copyright
laws, if not technically) to purchase one WinXP license

for each
computer on which it is installed. 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 (or at least

make more
difficult) the sort of multiple installations you're

asking about.


http://tinyurl.com/hhjj

218 times, but you still can't find one US Copyright Law
that prohibits an individual from installing software on
more than one computer! ROFL!

Do ya' think someone should get in touch with your NG
service provider to complain about your repeatedly sending
the same bogus message over & over again, what is in
essence, nothing but SPAM?!

"23. What is system abuse? Abuse of the system includes,
but is not limited to, exceeding the download limit on
your account, spamming, newsgroup flooding, and
unauthorized posting of copyrighted material. Abuse of the
system may result in action being taken against your
account." - http://www.supernews.com/faq.html#23





--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.kurttrail.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an
Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

  #8  
Old December 27th 03, 05:45 PM
Will Denny
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

Hi

Bruce is correct in his posting. Can you provide proof that anyone =
*can* install any MS OS onto more than one PC? Has MS stipulated that =
any of their OSes *can* be installed onto more than one PC?

Will

http://tinyurl.com/hhjj
=20
218 times, but you still can't find one US Copyright Law=20
that prohibits an individual from installing software on=20
more than one computer! ROFL!
=20
Do ya' think someone should get in touch with your NG=20
service provider to complain about your repeatedly sending=20
the same bogus message over & over again, what is in=20
essence, nothing but SPAM?!
=20
"23. What is system abuse? Abuse of the system includes,=20
but is not limited to, exceeding the download limit on=20
your account, spamming, newsgroup flooding, and=20
unauthorized posting of copyrighted material. Abuse of the=20
system may result in action being taken against your=20
account." - http://www.supernews.com/faq.html#23
=20


"kurttrail" wrote in =
message ...
=20
-----Original Message-----
Greetings --

As it has *always* been with *all* Microsoft=20

operating systems,
it's necessary (to be in compliance with both the EULA=20

and copyright
laws, if not technically) to purchase one WinXP license=20

for each
computer on which it is installed. The only way in which=20

WinXP
licensing differs from that of earlier versions of=20

Windows is that
Microsoft has finally added a copy protection and anti-

theft
mechanism, Product Activation, to prevent (or at least=20

make more
difficult) the sort of multiple installations you're=20

asking about.

=20




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (
http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 25/07/2003
  #9  
Old December 27th 03, 05:45 PM
kurttrail
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers


-----Original Message-----
Hi

Bruce is correct in his posting. Can you provide proof

that anyone *can* install any MS OS onto more than one
PC? Has MS stipulated that any of their OSes *can* be
installed onto more than one PC?


"to be in compliance with both the EULA and copyright
laws" - Bruce Chambers

There is not one US copyright law that a person wouldn't
be "in compliance with" by installing software on more
than one computer. I stand behind the words I write,
unlike Bruce!

Circuit Judge EASTERBROOK for the United States Court of
Appeals For the Seventh Circuit wrote:

"Shrinkwrap licenses are enforceable unless their terms are
objectionable on grounds applicable to contracts in
general (for example, if they violate a rule of positive
law, or if they are unconscionable)." -
http://www.law.emory.edu/7circuit/june96/96-1139.html

How is MS EULA unconscionable? "This software is licensed
not sold." This sentence is the basis for MS's claim of
turning a shrinkwrap license, into a software license.
Unfortunately with retail software, it is sold, and there
is a receipt to prove it.

The receipt doesn't say anything about a software license,
just the NAME of the SOFTWARE. And the previous owner of
that copy of software, the retail store owner, wasn't a
licensee of that copy of software either, but the owner!
And guess what? The retail store owner was sold that copy
by the previous owner, the wholesaler. So there were at
least 2 owners of that copy of software between MS and the
guy who is sold the software.

Now MS wants people to agree that reality didn't happen at
least three times since MS originally SOLD the copy of
software. LOL! Denying reality happened three times!
Sounds unconscionable to me!

People own every single retail product they buy, and there
is no legal precedent that says anything to the contrary!
That is the legal status quo at the present!

Oh, and one more thing, your TV came with a shrinkwrap
license too! Would you believe it if the TV's shrinkwrap
license said that TV wasn't sold?!

What law does MS's EULA violate?

Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 117. - Limitations on
exclusive rights: Computer programs

(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of
Copy. - Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it
is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a
computer program to make or authorize the making of
another copy or adaptation of that computer program
provided:

(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an
essential step in the utilization of the computer program
in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no
other manner, or

(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival
purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed
in the event that continued possession of the computer
program should cease to be rightful.

The following is a translation of Section 117 (a) from the
legalese using MS's own definitions:

Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117. - Limitations on the
exclusive rights of Copyright Owners: Computer programs

(a) Making of Additional Installation by the Owner of a
Copy of Software. - It is not infringement for the owner
of a copy of software to make another installation
provided:

(1) that such a new installation is made as a necessary
step in making use of the software together with a
previously unknown computer and that it is used in no
other manner, or

"(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival
purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed
in the event that continued possession of the computer
program should cease to be rightful"

Installation -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=adaptation

made -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=created

necessary -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=essential

making use -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=utilize

together with -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=conjunction

a previously unknown -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?refid=1861582871

or -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=or

What words mean does matter! Only a total buffoon would
even try to argue otherwise!

MS has yet to prove they have the right to enforce their
One Computer nonsense in the privacy of any individual's
home in a real court of law. Why? Because a majority of
the Supreme Court agreed that "Any individual may
reproduce a copyrighted work for a"fair use"; the
copyright owner does not possess the exclusive right to
such a use." - http://laws.findlaw.com/us/464/417.html

Until there is some definitive legal precedent that clears
this all up, one way or another, shouldn't each individual
decide for themselves what they can and can not do with
the retail software that was legally SOLD to them by the
previous owner of that software?!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.kurttrail.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an
Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
  #10  
Old December 27th 03, 05:47 PM
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

You sure continue to stretch it don't you.
Read the EULA.
You can return any Microsoft product sold in North America within 30
days.
If you do not agree, return it.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...oups/setup.asp
http://dts-l.org/index.html


"kurttrail" wrote in
message ...

-----Original Message-----
Hi

Bruce is correct in his posting. Can you provide proof

that anyone *can* install any MS OS onto more than one
PC? Has MS stipulated that any of their OSes *can* be
installed onto more than one PC?


"to be in compliance with both the EULA and copyright
laws" - Bruce Chambers

There is not one US copyright law that a person wouldn't
be "in compliance with" by installing software on more
than one computer. I stand behind the words I write,
unlike Bruce!

Circuit Judge EASTERBROOK for the United States Court of
Appeals For the Seventh Circuit wrote:

"Shrinkwrap licenses are enforceable unless their terms are
objectionable on grounds applicable to contracts in
general (for example, if they violate a rule of positive
law, or if they are unconscionable)." -
http://www.law.emory.edu/7circuit/june96/96-1139.html

How is MS EULA unconscionable? "This software is licensed
not sold." This sentence is the basis for MS's claim of
turning a shrinkwrap license, into a software license.
Unfortunately with retail software, it is sold, and there
is a receipt to prove it.

The receipt doesn't say anything about a software license,
just the NAME of the SOFTWARE. And the previous owner of
that copy of software, the retail store owner, wasn't a
licensee of that copy of software either, but the owner!
And guess what? The retail store owner was sold that copy
by the previous owner, the wholesaler. So there were at
least 2 owners of that copy of software between MS and the
guy who is sold the software.

Now MS wants people to agree that reality didn't happen at
least three times since MS originally SOLD the copy of
software. LOL! Denying reality happened three times!
Sounds unconscionable to me!

People own every single retail product they buy, and there
is no legal precedent that says anything to the contrary!
That is the legal status quo at the present!

Oh, and one more thing, your TV came with a shrinkwrap
license too! Would you believe it if the TV's shrinkwrap
license said that TV wasn't sold?!

What law does MS's EULA violate?

Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 117. - Limitations on
exclusive rights: Computer programs

(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of
Copy. - Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it
is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a
computer program to make or authorize the making of
another copy or adaptation of that computer program
provided:

(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an
essential step in the utilization of the computer program
in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no
other manner, or

(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival
purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed
in the event that continued possession of the computer
program should cease to be rightful.

The following is a translation of Section 117 (a) from the
legalese using MS's own definitions:

Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117. - Limitations on the
exclusive rights of Copyright Owners: Computer programs

(a) Making of Additional Installation by the Owner of a
Copy of Software. - It is not infringement for the owner
of a copy of software to make another installation
provided:

(1) that such a new installation is made as a necessary
step in making use of the software together with a
previously unknown computer and that it is used in no
other manner, or

"(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival
purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed
in the event that continued possession of the computer
program should cease to be rightful"

Installation -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=adaptation

made -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=created

necessary -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=essential

making use -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=utilize

together with -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=conjunction

a previously unknown -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?refid=1861582871

or -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=or

What words mean does matter! Only a total buffoon would
even try to argue otherwise!

MS has yet to prove they have the right to enforce their
One Computer nonsense in the privacy of any individual's
home in a real court of law. Why? Because a majority of
the Supreme Court agreed that "Any individual may
reproduce a copyrighted work for a"fair use"; the
copyright owner does not possess the exclusive right to
such a use." - http://laws.findlaw.com/us/464/417.html

Until there is some definitive legal precedent that clears
this all up, one way or another, shouldn't each individual
decide for themselves what they can and can not do with
the retail software that was legally SOLD to them by the
previous owner of that software?!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.kurttrail.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an
Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"



  #11  
Old December 27th 03, 05:47 PM
kurttrail
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:

You sure continue to stretch it don't you.
Read the EULA.


I have, that's how I know it's based on a lie, that the software isn't
sold.

You can return any Microsoft product sold in North America within 30
days.
If you do not agree, return it.


Not for free! You have to pay for shipping!

But what does any of this have to do with what I wrote, or Bruce
Chambers oft-repeated but bogus claim that one wouldn't be in compliance
with "COPYRIGHT LAWS" for installing software on more than one computer!
If he would just say that one would not be in compliance with the EULA,
that would be the truth, though that still wouldn't mean that a court
would actually enforce it on individuals, if MS ever grew the balls to
actually enforce their EULA on individuals by legal means thru the court
system, but that's Contract Law. Bruce, or anyone else, has never found
one US copyright law that an individual would not be in compliance with
when installing the same copy of software on more than one computer!

Or do you condone his repeatedly posting 218 times that which nobody has
been able to prove, because there are no existing US copyright laws that
prohibits an individual from installing the same copy of software on
more than one computer?!

Or is that how you MS-MVP's earn your free MSDN subscriptions by
misrepresenting the truth for MS?!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.kurttrail.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"


"kurttrail" wrote in
message ...

-----Original Message-----
Hi

Bruce is correct in his posting. Can you provide proof

that anyone *can* install any MS OS onto more than one
PC? Has MS stipulated that any of their OSes *can* be
installed onto more than one PC?


"to be in compliance with both the EULA and copyright
laws" - Bruce Chambers

There is not one US copyright law that a person wouldn't
be "in compliance with" by installing software on more
than one computer. I stand behind the words I write,
unlike Bruce!

Circuit Judge EASTERBROOK for the United States Court of
Appeals For the Seventh Circuit wrote:

"Shrinkwrap licenses are enforceable unless their terms are
objectionable on grounds applicable to contracts in
general (for example, if they violate a rule of positive
law, or if they are unconscionable)." -
http://www.law.emory.edu/7circuit/june96/96-1139.html

How is MS EULA unconscionable? "This software is licensed
not sold." This sentence is the basis for MS's claim of
turning a shrinkwrap license, into a software license.
Unfortunately with retail software, it is sold, and there
is a receipt to prove it.

The receipt doesn't say anything about a software license,
just the NAME of the SOFTWARE. And the previous owner of
that copy of software, the retail store owner, wasn't a
licensee of that copy of software either, but the owner!
And guess what? The retail store owner was sold that copy
by the previous owner, the wholesaler. So there were at
least 2 owners of that copy of software between MS and the
guy who is sold the software.

Now MS wants people to agree that reality didn't happen at
least three times since MS originally SOLD the copy of
software. LOL! Denying reality happened three times!
Sounds unconscionable to me!

People own every single retail product they buy, and there
is no legal precedent that says anything to the contrary!
That is the legal status quo at the present!

Oh, and one more thing, your TV came with a shrinkwrap
license too! Would you believe it if the TV's shrinkwrap
license said that TV wasn't sold?!

What law does MS's EULA violate?

Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 117. - Limitations on
exclusive rights: Computer programs

(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of
Copy. - Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it
is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a
computer program to make or authorize the making of
another copy or adaptation of that computer program
provided:

(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an
essential step in the utilization of the computer program
in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no
other manner, or

(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival
purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed
in the event that continued possession of the computer
program should cease to be rightful.

The following is a translation of Section 117 (a) from the
legalese using MS's own definitions:

Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117. - Limitations on the
exclusive rights of Copyright Owners: Computer programs

(a) Making of Additional Installation by the Owner of a
Copy of Software. - It is not infringement for the owner
of a copy of software to make another installation
provided:

(1) that such a new installation is made as a necessary
step in making use of the software together with a
previously unknown computer and that it is used in no
other manner, or

"(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival
purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed
in the event that continued possession of the computer
program should cease to be rightful"

Installation -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=adaptation

made -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=created

necessary -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=essential

making use -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=utilize

together with -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=conjunction

a previously unknown -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?refid=1861582871

or -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=or

What words mean does matter! Only a total buffoon would
even try to argue otherwise!

MS has yet to prove they have the right to enforce their
One Computer nonsense in the privacy of any individual's
home in a real court of law. Why? Because a majority of
the Supreme Court agreed that "Any individual may
reproduce a copyrighted work for a"fair use"; the
copyright owner does not possess the exclusive right to
such a use." - http://laws.findlaw.com/us/464/417.html

Until there is some definitive legal precedent that clears
this all up, one way or another, shouldn't each individual
decide for themselves what they can and can not do with
the retail software that was legally SOLD to them by the
previous owner of that software?!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.kurttrail.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an
Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"



  #12  
Old December 27th 03, 05:47 PM
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

Your signature explains your attitude.
"Peace"... you do not appear to believe in it
"Self-anointed Moderator"...Absolutely meaningless

The rest...describes your true beliefs and intentions

No response necessary unless you like to talk to yourself and have the
last word (little doubt you do)


--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...oups/setup.asp
http://dts-l.org/index.html


"kurttrail" wrote in
message ...
SNIPPED
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.kurttrail.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"


"kurttrail" wrote in
message ...

-----Original Message-----
Hi

Bruce is correct in his posting. Can you provide proof
that anyone *can* install any MS OS onto more than one
PC? Has MS stipulated that any of their OSes *can* be
installed onto more than one PC?


"to be in compliance with both the EULA and copyright
laws" - Bruce Chambers

There is not one US copyright law that a person wouldn't
be "in compliance with" by installing software on more
than one computer. I stand behind the words I write,
unlike Bruce!

Circuit Judge EASTERBROOK for the United States Court of
Appeals For the Seventh Circuit wrote:

"Shrinkwrap licenses are enforceable unless their terms are
objectionable on grounds applicable to contracts in
general (for example, if they violate a rule of positive
law, or if they are unconscionable)." -
http://www.law.emory.edu/7circuit/june96/96-1139.html

How is MS EULA unconscionable? "This software is licensed
not sold." This sentence is the basis for MS's claim of
turning a shrinkwrap license, into a software license.
Unfortunately with retail software, it is sold, and there
is a receipt to prove it.

The receipt doesn't say anything about a software license,
just the NAME of the SOFTWARE. And the previous owner of
that copy of software, the retail store owner, wasn't a
licensee of that copy of software either, but the owner!
And guess what? The retail store owner was sold that copy
by the previous owner, the wholesaler. So there were at
least 2 owners of that copy of software between MS and the
guy who is sold the software.

Now MS wants people to agree that reality didn't happen at
least three times since MS originally SOLD the copy of
software. LOL! Denying reality happened three times!
Sounds unconscionable to me!

People own every single retail product they buy, and there
is no legal precedent that says anything to the contrary!
That is the legal status quo at the present!

Oh, and one more thing, your TV came with a shrinkwrap
license too! Would you believe it if the TV's shrinkwrap
license said that TV wasn't sold?!

What law does MS's EULA violate?

Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 117. - Limitations on
exclusive rights: Computer programs

(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of
Copy. - Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it
is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a
computer program to make or authorize the making of
another copy or adaptation of that computer program
provided:

(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an
essential step in the utilization of the computer program
in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no
other manner, or

(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival
purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed
in the event that continued possession of the computer
program should cease to be rightful.

The following is a translation of Section 117 (a) from the
legalese using MS's own definitions:

Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117. - Limitations on the
exclusive rights of Copyright Owners: Computer programs

(a) Making of Additional Installation by the Owner of a
Copy of Software. - It is not infringement for the owner
of a copy of software to make another installation
provided:

(1) that such a new installation is made as a necessary
step in making use of the software together with a
previously unknown computer and that it is used in no
other manner, or

"(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival
purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed
in the event that continued possession of the computer
program should cease to be rightful"

Installation -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=adaptation

made -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=created

necessary -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=essential

making use -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=utilize

together with -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=conjunction

a previously unknown -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?refid=1861582871

or -
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/featur...nary/Dictionar
yResults.aspx?search=or

What words mean does matter! Only a total buffoon would
even try to argue otherwise!

MS has yet to prove they have the right to enforce their
One Computer nonsense in the privacy of any individual's
home in a real court of law. Why? Because a majority of
the Supreme Court agreed that "Any individual may
reproduce a copyrighted work for a"fair use"; the
copyright owner does not possess the exclusive right to
such a use." - http://laws.findlaw.com/us/464/417.html

Until there is some definitive legal precedent that clears
this all up, one way or another, shouldn't each individual
decide for themselves what they can and can not do with
the retail software that was legally SOLD to them by the
previous owner of that software?!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.kurttrail.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an
Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"





  #13  
Old December 27th 03, 05:47 PM
Ted
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers


"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote in message =
...
Your signature explains your attitude.
"Peace"... you do not appear to believe in it
"Self-anointed Moderator"...Absolutely meaningless
=20
The rest...describes your true beliefs and intentions
=20
No response necessary unless you like to talk to yourself and have the
last word (little doubt you do)


You're, INUT, a pussy, and afraid to answer what he ask you! To actaully =
have another MVP say that another may be wrong, is somehow against the =
rules of maintaining lies, IMHO. Also, are you afraid to criticise MS =
for thier terms as stated, or what Bruce states isn't in the EULA? =
Bruce, states that it violates "Copyright Laws" in effect of one using =
the same copy of software on two separate devices, that are stated in =
the EULA to be only used on one. Yet, nowhere in any local, state, or US =
written laws does it say anything covering this kind of purported (and =
wrongly termed) use as a "copyright" violation. It can certainly be a =
civil offense in breaking an agreement, but not a legal violation, as =
Bruce makes it seem criminal.

Altogether now! I state, to maintain my MSDN subscription of free =
giftware from MS, not to tell the truth about MS, because I like my free =
stuff, and ass kissing MS, and each other, as MVPs is ethical!
  #14  
Old December 27th 03, 05:48 PM
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

Ted;
Your name calling shows your true character just as the other poster
showed his true self.
People resort to name calling when they lack the ability to support
their position and need all the help they can get to support their
position.
Come back when you have points that do not include your silly name
calling.
Perhaps then you may be taken seriously.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...oups/setup.asp
http://dts-l.org/index.html


"Ted" """""'""""""" wrote in message
s.com...

You're, INUT, a pussy, and afraid to answer what he ask you! To
actaully have another MVP say that another may be wrong, is somehow
against the rules of maintaining lies, IMHO. Also, are you afraid to
criticise MS for thier terms as stated, or what Bruce states isn't in
the EULA? Bruce, states that it violates "Copyright Laws" in effect of
one using the same copy of software on two separate devices, that are
stated in the EULA to be only used on one. Yet, nowhere in any local,
state, or US written laws does it say anything covering this kind of
purported (and wrongly termed) use as a "copyright" violation. It can
certainly be a civil offense in breaking an agreement, but not a legal
violation, as Bruce makes it seem criminal.

Altogether now! I state, to maintain my MSDN subscription of free
giftware from MS, not to tell the truth about MS, because I like my
free stuff, and ass kissing MS, and each other, as MVPs is ethical!


  #15  
Old December 27th 03, 05:48 PM
kurttrail
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default using windows on two computers

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:

Your signature explains your attitude.
"Peace"...


Peace - Inner contentment; serenity -
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=peace

you do not appear to believe in it


I wish that all have the Inner contentment I have found!

"Self-anointed Moderator"...Absolutely meaningless


Self-deprecating Humor!


The rest...describes your true beliefs and intentions


Like "Trustworthy Computing" isn't an oxymoron? MS wouldn't have an
average of about a patch a week after SP1, if Windows XP were truely
trustworthy! SP1 came out long after MS announce their "Trustworthy
Computing" initiative, not to mention the patch they had to rework, nor
that DX9 in now in a "b" version!

And to me, putting an OS with PA on my machine is analogous to putting
my computer into a MS concentration camp!

No response necessary unless you like to talk to yourself and have the
last word (little doubt you do)


Or I want to challenge you to actually answer my post rather than
attacking to me in order to avoid answering my legitimate questions!

Is that something they teach in MS-MVP school, how to not reply to
questions you don't want to answer, by attacking the questioner?

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.kurttrail.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2018 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.