Have licences, where can I get XP media/files

Hi,

I've got two dead laptops - one XP Home one XP Pro. I want to use the
licenses to install on other machines (one under VirtualPC).

The problem is I only have OEM reinstallation disks; is there anywhere one
can obtain - for free, I have already paid for my licenses! - XP so that I
can install it and enter my valid validation codes?

Thanks

--
Julian I-Do-Stuff

Some Vista stuff, but mostly just Stuff at http://berossus,blogspot.com

Julian wrote:
I've got two dead laptops - one XP Home one XP Pro. I want to use
the licenses to install on other machines (one under VirtualPC).

The problem is I only have OEM reinstallation disks; is there
anywhere one can obtain - for free, I have already paid for my
licenses! - XP so that I can install it and enter my valid
validation codes?

First off - if the laptops came with Windows XP pre-installed - that's an
OEM licensed copy (most of the time.) The license died with the laptop(s)
and cannot be transferred per the strict End-User Licensing Agreement for
OEMs. It's a limitation well published on the Internet and well disliked by
everyone - particularly those who find out later they lost their license
when the machine they first installed it upon and activated it upon died.

Secondly - what do you mean by "reinstallation disks"? True installation
media? If so - you have the files. If not - you can get generic OEM media
from friends/family/etc... Most likely - for installaiton on the laptops
when you get them repaired.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

"Julian" wrote in message
...
Hi,

I've got two dead laptops - one XP Home one XP Pro. I want to use the
licenses to install on other machines (one under VirtualPC).

The problem is I only have OEM reinstallation disks; is there anywhere
one can obtain - for free, I have already paid for my licenses! - XP
so that I can install it and enter my valid validation codes?

I assume these laptops came with non-transferrable OEM licenses. That
means the licenses are to run XP on only on *those* machines.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 21:50:45 +0100, "Julian"
wrote:

Hi,

I've got two dead laptops - one XP Home one XP Pro. I want to use the
licenses to install on other machines (one under VirtualPC).

The problem is I only have OEM reinstallation disks; is there anywhere one
can obtain - for free, I have already paid for my licenses! - XP so that I
can install it and enter my valid validation codes?


No. You may not use your licenses to install these on other machines.
You clearly have OEM licenses, and the biggest disadvantage of an OEM
license is that it is good only on the first computer it's installed
on. It may never be moved to another computer, not even if the first
one dies.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

Julian wrote:
Hi,

I've got two dead laptops - one XP Home one XP Pro. I want to use the
licenses to install on other machines (one under VirtualPC).

The problem is I only have OEM reinstallation disks; is there anywhere
one can obtain - for free, I have already paid for my licenses! - XP so
that I can install it and enter my valid validation codes?

Thanks



By your own admission, you have an OEM licenses for WinXP. An OEM
version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a motherboard or
hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_ bound to the first
PC on which it's installed. An OEM license, once installed, is not
legally transferable to another computer under _any_ circumstances.


--

Bruce Chambers

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

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

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

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

I didn't know the licenses died with the machines.

Thanks for pointing it out.

--
Julian I-Do-Stuff

Some Vista stuff, but mostly just Stuff at http://berossus,blogspot.com

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:07:01 -0700, Bruce Chambers
wrote:

By your own admission, you have an OEM licenses for WinXP. An OEM
version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a motherboard or
hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_ bound to the first
PC on which it's installed.

Tell that to a bazillion retailers both on and offline. It would
appear that the requirement is urban legend.

"Cody Jarrett" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:07:01 -0700, Bruce Chambers
wrote:

By your own admission, you have an OEM licenses for WinXP. An OEM
version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a motherboard or
hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_ bound to the first
PC on which it's installed.

Tell that to a bazillion retailers both on and offline. It would
appear that the requirement is urban legend.

That is not necessarily true. There is a body of opinion that in certain
jurisdictions that some of the conditions in Microsoft's EULA (and in
particular the bit about non transferability of the operating system) are
not actually enforceable. Microsoft disagrees with this opinion (not
unsurprisingly) however, this would need to be properly tested in a court of
law before it can formally be declared an urban legend.

M.I.5¾ wrote:
"Cody Jarrett" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:07:01 -0700, Bruce Chambers
wrote:

By your own admission, you have an OEM licenses for WinXP. An OEM
version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a motherboard or
hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_ bound to the first
PC on which it's installed.
Tell that to a bazillion retailers both on and offline. It would
appear that the requirement is urban legend.

That is not necessarily true. There is a body of opinion that in certain
jurisdictions that some of the conditions in Microsoft's EULA (and in
particular the bit about non transferability of the operating system) are
not actually enforceable. Microsoft disagrees with this opinion (not
unsurprisingly) however, this would need to be properly tested in a court of
law before it can formally be declared an urban legend.



And it will be snowing in Caracas before MS grows the balls to take
anyone to court for EULA violation. They know it's unconscionable but
they also know hardly anyone reads them and relies on FUD to keep their
paying customers confused.

Alias

"Alias" wrote in message
...
M.I.5¾ wrote:
"Cody Jarrett" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:07:01 -0700, Bruce Chambers
wrote:

By your own admission, you have an OEM licenses for WinXP. An OEM
version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a motherboard
or
hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_ bound to the first
PC on which it's installed.
Tell that to a bazillion retailers both on and offline. It would
appear that the requirement is urban legend.

That is not necessarily true. There is a body of opinion that in certain
jurisdictions that some of the conditions in Microsoft's EULA (and in
particular the bit about non transferability of the operating system) are
not actually enforceable. Microsoft disagrees with this opinion (not
unsurprisingly) however, this would need to be properly tested in a court
of law before it can formally be declared an urban legend.

And it will be snowing in Caracas before MS grows the balls to take anyone
to court for EULA violation. They know it's unconscionable but they also
know hardly anyone reads them and relies on FUD to keep their paying
customers confused.


Absolutely, and indeed on those occasions when they have actually issued
proceedings, they have settled out of court at the 11th hour rather than let
the case come to court, usually with a non disclosure agreement wrapping the
settlement.

One of the more recent cases involved a student who bought the student
edition of Microsoft office before buying a laptop with the product already
installed. He sold the student Office on e-bay for a profit, but Microsoft
weren't impressed and issued proceedings. Part of said student's defence
was that the Office he bought stated that if he didn't agree with the
licence terms, then the product should be returned for a full refund. He
had in fact attempted to do so but the return was allegedly refused.

M.I.5¾ wrote:
"Alias" wrote in message
...
M.I.5¾ wrote:
"Cody Jarrett" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:07:01 -0700, Bruce Chambers
wrote:

By your own admission, you have an OEM licenses for WinXP. An OEM
version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a motherboard
or
hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_ bound to the first
PC on which it's installed.
Tell that to a bazillion retailers both on and offline. It would
appear that the requirement is urban legend.
That is not necessarily true. There is a body of opinion that in certain
jurisdictions that some of the conditions in Microsoft's EULA (and in
particular the bit about non transferability of the operating system) are
not actually enforceable. Microsoft disagrees with this opinion (not
unsurprisingly) however, this would need to be properly tested in a court
of law before it can formally be declared an urban legend.
And it will be snowing in Caracas before MS grows the balls to take anyone
to court for EULA violation. They know it's unconscionable but they also
know hardly anyone reads them and relies on FUD to keep their paying
customers confused.


Absolutely, and indeed on those occasions when they have actually issued
proceedings, they have settled out of court at the 11th hour rather than let
the case come to court, usually with a non disclosure agreement wrapping the
settlement.

One of the more recent cases involved a student who bought the student
edition of Microsoft office before buying a laptop with the product already
installed. He sold the student Office on e-bay for a profit, but Microsoft
weren't impressed and issued proceedings. Part of said student's defence
was that the Office he bought stated that if he didn't agree with the
licence terms, then the product should be returned for a full refund. He
had in fact attempted to do so but the return was allegedly refused.



Yeah, the Catch 22 of shrink wrapped software where you don't get to see
the EULA until after you've opened the package and an opened package --
per the vendor -- gets no refund.

Alias

"Bruce Chambers" wrote in message
...

An OEM version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally
a motherboard or hard rive, if not an entire PC)

Up until 2005, this was the rule. And to stay within the letter of the
law, one could purchase an OEM version of XP from a retailer as long as
the retailer also included "non-peripheral" hardware. So, as silly as it
was, a lot of times retailers included power cords!

This loophole (of including hardware with the purchase) was supposedly
resolved in 2005 with a newer EULA, but once again, there appeared
another loophole: "when the end-user is actually assembling their own
PC, in which case, that end user is considered a system builder as well,
under the definition in the OEM system builder license agreement."

Many retailers apparently are still going by the old rules. Earlier this
year, I purchased a single-pack System Builder OEM XP CD from a retailer
(unopened, of course) and they insisted on selling it with a mouse (even
though this is nol longer necessary). I purchased it for my
sister-in-law, who decided she hated the Vista OS that came with her
Acer laptop. Now, this XP license will only ever be used in conjunction
with this particular laptop and since I am operating as the System
Builder, I and not Microsoft will be providing support, so I see no
ethical problems. I can see someone arguing that I can't be a System
Builder since I didn't build the laptop, but I'm not sure that this term
has ever been scrupulously defined. As far as I'm concerned, the system
is the whole entity. This entity (laptop plus XP) had never existed
before; I was the one who created it.

If a person is building his own system, you would normally expect that
person to be purchasing hardware! But all this means is that a retailer
is able to sell an OEM XP CD to a person who *is* a system builder. It's
possible that the hardware has already been purchased. And a system
builder can be a single person.

So, long story short, depending on how one interprets this
open-to-interpretation EULA, these CDs need *not* be sold with
hardware -- as long as they are being sold to a System Builder.

Cody Jarrett wrote:
By your own admission, you have an OEM licenses for WinXP. An OEM
version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a motherboard or
hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_ bound to the first
PC on which it's installed.

Tell that to a bazillion retailers both on and offline. It would
appear that the requirement is urban legend.

Just because someone sells OEM CDs & licenses doesn't mean they'll work.

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 11:57:11 -0500, "PA Bear [MS MVP]"
wrote:

Cody Jarrett wrote:
By your own admission, you have an OEM licenses for WinXP. An OEM
version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a motherboard or
hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_ bound to the first
PC on which it's installed.

Tell that to a bazillion retailers both on and offline. It would
appear that the requirement is urban legend.

Just because someone sells OEM CDs & licenses doesn't mean they'll work.

WTF are you talking about? I didn't mention eBay or private sellers.
I am talking about reputable retailers.

You're muddying the waters without having a freaking clue.

"Alias" wrote in message
...
M.I.5¾ wrote:
"Alias" wrote in message
...
M.I.5¾ wrote:
"Cody Jarrett" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:07:01 -0700, Bruce Chambers
wrote:

By your own admission, you have an OEM licenses for WinXP. An
OEM
version must be sold with a piece of hardware (normally a motherboard
or
hard rive, if not an entire PC) and is _permanently_ bound to the
first
PC on which it's installed.
Tell that to a bazillion retailers both on and offline. It would
appear that the requirement is urban legend.
That is not necessarily true. There is a body of opinion that in
certain jurisdictions that some of the conditions in Microsoft's EULA
(and in particular the bit about non transferability of the operating
system) are not actually enforceable. Microsoft disagrees with this
opinion (not unsurprisingly) however, this would need to be properly
tested in a court of law before it can formally be declared an urban
legend.
And it will be snowing in Caracas before MS grows the balls to take
anyone to court for EULA violation. They know it's unconscionable but
they also know hardly anyone reads them and relies on FUD to keep their
paying customers confused.


Absolutely, and indeed on those occasions when they have actually issued
proceedings, they have settled out of court at the 11th hour rather than
let the case come to court, usually with a non disclosure agreement
wrapping the settlement.

One of the more recent cases involved a student who bought the student
edition of Microsoft office before buying a laptop with the product
already installed. He sold the student Office on e-bay for a profit, but
Microsoft weren't impressed and issued proceedings. Part of said
student's defence was that the Office he bought stated that if he didn't
agree with the licence terms, then the product should be returned for a
full refund. He had in fact attempted to do so but the return was
allegedly refused.

Yeah, the Catch 22 of shrink wrapped software where you don't get to see
the EULA until after you've opened the package and an opened package --
per the vendor -- gets no refund.


There is no catch 22 at all. The European courts have actually ruled on
that point (and only reinforced what UK contract law already said). The
ruling was that any licence terms and conditions (EULA) that are not visible
to the purchaser, or drawn to his attention, before the contract of sale is
struck are not enforceable as they constitute an unlawful unilateral
variation to the established contract. In spite of this Microsoft (and
indeed other software vendors) continue to insist that installing the
software and checking the box that agrees to the EULA as part of that
process makes the EULA enforceable. This usually forms the main plank of
their litigation that never makes it to court.