using windows on two computers

"kurttrail" wrote in
:

David wrote:

Tell me, Kurt. You claim you bought XP. Can you create copes of XP
and sell them for profit?

David

No. That wouldn't wouldn't be a fair use, and I've never advocated the
distribution of copyright material to others outside of the privacy of
the home. And I've never bought Windows XP, nor do I use Windows XP in
my home. Any future Microsoft products are dead to me!


But. You "Bought" Windows XP. You transffered cash and got a Receipt.
Since you bought, and "OWN" XP. You should be able to do whatever you
want with it. You Own it now. According to you. How is it you "Own"
something, yet have no rights with it??

Microsoft bought DOS form Seattle Computer Products' Tim Patterson, the
creator of DOS. Since they bought DOS. They had the rights to copy,
improve, and sell DOS. Why don't you have these rights with Windows now
that you "Bought" it?

Could it be that you never "bought" Windows. Just merely a license to
use it?

David

David wrote:

"kurttrail" wrote in
:

David wrote:

Tell me, Kurt. You claim you bought XP. Can you create copes of
XP and sell them for profit?

David

No. That wouldn't wouldn't be a fair use, and I've never advocated
the distribution of copyright material to others outside of the
privacy of the home. And I've never bought Windows XP, nor do I use
Windows XP in my home. Any future Microsoft products are dead to me!


But. You "Bought" Windows XP. You transffered cash and got a Receipt.
Since you bought, and "OWN" XP. You should be able to do whatever you
want with it. You Own it now. According to you. How is it you "Own"
something, yet have no rights with it??

Microsoft bought DOS form Seattle Computer Products' Tim Patterson,
the creator of DOS. Since they bought DOS. They had the rights to
copy, improve, and sell DOS. Why don't you have these rights with
Windows now that you "Bought" it?

Could it be that you never "bought" Windows. Just merely a license to
use it?


I'm not claiming any of the rights of copyright ownership. I'm arguing
that MS's post-sale license is not a legitimate software usage license,
that only confers limited rights to use a *copy* of software, but is
only a shrinkwrap license on a retail *copy* of software, which is sold
to the new owner of that *copy* by the retailer. Congress put certain
limitations on the rights of copyright owners, in other words, they gave
owners of a *copy* the right to infringe in certain circumstances. [And
under certain circumstances one does not even need to be an owner of a
*copy* in order to legally infringe, though none of those circumstances
are applicable to this discussion.] I never claimed to own the
copyright, just the *copy* *of* *software* that was sold to me by
previous owner of that *copy*, the retailer.

What is a *copy*? "'*Copies*' are material objects, other than
phonorecords, in which a work is fixed by any method now known or later
developed, and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or
otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or
device. The term '*copies*' includes the material object, other than a
phonorecord, in which the work is first fixed." -
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/101.html

Owner of *Copy* and owner of Copyright are two separate & distinct
things under Title 17. *Copies* are material objects, or property, and
Copyright is not.

Which brings us back to Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117, and MS's
post-sale attempt to rewrite it through a shrinkwrap license. The
*copy* *of* *software* is sold to you, thus you are the owner of a
*copy*, and Congress through Copyright law gave owners of a *copy* *of*
*software* the right to infringe.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/117.html

--
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!"

snipped a bunch of crap

Installing software on more than one computer has nothing to do with
copyrighting. Sharing, distributing, or using any part of it for your own
profit is however. The very last lines of the EULA says its governed by the
state of washington, who cares, I'm in california.. No one here will ever
post the truth, and microsoft will continue to sit back and find new ways to
take our money. Its more profitable for them to keep this argument out of
court, the less people that know the truth the less the headache for them.

G.I.Joe