OEM versus Upgrade

just because someone has criticisms on liscensing does not imply they are
not obiding by them. That is what you call dichotimized political skewing.
Good political strategy, 'oh person G is complaining about privacy
rights? He must be a criminal or doing something wrong. This implies that
only the criminal wants privacy. So therefore, people are afraid to want
privacy because they unknowingly pick up the implication of oh if i am for
privacy that is going to lead people to think i am a criminal. This is
brilliant political strategy.
"Leythos" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:00:02 +0100, Alias wrote:


"Leythos" wrote

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 07:23:04 -0500, mrpsychology wrote:

That is why i was thinking i could get a refund from hewlett packard by
sending in the 9 cds. Because then i could get money back and they
could install that windows on another one of their computers.

It doesn't work that way - you used the License and that's the way it
works, once used it's not good for anyone/thing else.

And you don't consider that to be a rip off scam, you, who are
soooooooooo
honest, moral and perfect???

Alias, I didn't comment on anything except the Licensing issue. My
personal "Opinion" of what should be fair and not doesn't enter into a
factual discussion. I personally abide by all licenses, software or
otherwise.

--

remove 999 in order to email me

That is what they are doing i believe, planned legal war. Set up things
that are so easily violated you can own them in court. I am really getting
interested in this topic because it allows one to see how narrow the
definition of a computer can actually become through these legal claims.
Oracle on that site, wants to give liscences or actually does i am not sure,
but, i did not miss the point they want to liscence per core that is in the
single processor! I have always defined a computer as a whole, but, i have
always thought the motherboard should be used to liscence. Because that
would be the fair root. So therefore you could change the cpu and change
hardrives and so forth. I mean, everything plugs into the motherboard
including the cpu to work right?
Well, in psychology, i am a holistic thinker or follower, as
Gestalt would state as well as Adler, YOU CANNOT SEPARATE A PIECE OR SMALL
ENTITY FROM THE WHOLE!!!!!! That is what they are doing when they liscence
per cpu, they are taking a piece of the computer and calling it the whole
which disregards the other parts. Naturally, a computer wont work without
the cpu, but it equally wont work without the motherboard or for the
powersupply. Ram well, it would work if it only used cache memory right?
"kurttrail" wrote in message
...
Leythos wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:00:02 +0100, Alias wrote:


"Leythos" wrote

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 07:23:04 -0500, mrpsychology wrote:

That is why i was thinking i could get a refund from hewlett
packard by sending in the 9 cds. Because then i could get money
back and they could install that windows on another one of their
computers.

It doesn't work that way - you used the License and that's the way
it works, once used it's not good for anyone/thing else.

And you don't consider that to be a rip off scam, you, who are
soooooooooo honest, moral and perfect???

Alias, I didn't comment on anything except the Licensing issue. My
personal "Opinion" of what should be fair and not doesn't enter into a
factual discussion. I personally abide by all licenses, software or
otherwise.

There you go again, assuming the unsubstatiated licensing *CLAIMS* of MS,
or one of its employees, are actually factual!

Let's take SCO and IBM. SCO *CLAIMS* that IBM has violated the UNIX
license. Has IBM actually violated the license just because SCO *CLAIMS*
IBM violated the UNIX license? And if that is the case, then why bother
having the trial at all?

Let's see you avoid answering these questions yet again, Lamethos!

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

As Socrates would state, you need to define 'computer' what makes the
computer, is it the cpu by itself?
"BBUNNY" wrote in message
...
Alias wrote:
"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote

None of this is relevant - when you install the product to the
computer or the computer that you first place the hardware in etc it
becomes part of that computer for licensing terms.

Of course, MS doesn't really define what a new computer is. If I were
the OP, I would make sure that something, even a screw, came from the
old computer and I would call it upgrading and I could then legally use
the OEM I paid for and not have to enrich MS' coffers by buying the OS
again to use on ONE computer.

That is the way that the EULA reads. _Hardware_

yeah microsoft is enjoying their battles in Europe lol.
"kurttrail" wrote in message
...
BBUNNY wrote:
Alias wrote:
"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote

None of this is relevant - when you install the product to the
computer or the computer that you first place the hardware in etc
it becomes part of that computer for licensing terms.

Of course, MS doesn't really define what a new computer is. If I
were the OP, I would make sure that something, even a screw, came
from the old computer and I would call it upgrading and I could
then legally use the OEM I paid for and not have to enrich MS'
coffers by buying the OS again to use on ONE computer.

That is the way that the EULA reads. _Hardware_

The RTM pre-SP1 version of OEM XP reads that way. MS changed it to
COMPUTER for SP1, because of all the sh*t it got in their public
newsgroups. And I was one of the most prolific sh*t-throwers!

Now, the way OEM XP SP1 and later EULAs read, it denies the reality terms
of sale for those that buy generic OEM XP with a hardware component.

The idiots at MS Legal should be fired, as the EULA asks people to agree
to terms post-sale, that are in direct contradiction with the actual terms
of the sale at the time of the sale.

Even a business would stand a good chance of winning, if MS ever tried to
enforce their OEM 1st install Computer Only term by pursuing it in court,
that is if that business could afford the time and money to fight MS!

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

So, individuals cant get academic software? Not students? Actually, that
bringts a spontaneous question, does it exlcude high school students? whatr
would make high school nonacademic? And then you would be suing the pants
off all the schools selling academic versins to students in college lol.
"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote in message
...
"mrpsychology" wrote in message
...
Now, doesnt microsoft have academic pricing and as well people who work
in the field of education as well? Workign in Daycare would constitute
education working wouldnt it? Or nonprofit?

see
The Microsoft Open License Charity program allows eligible nonprofit
organizations to acquire multiple software licenses-rather than multiple
software packages-at reduced prices
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/p...encharity.mspx

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"mrpsychology" wrote in message
...
Now, doesnt microsoft have academic pricing and as well people who work
in the field of education as well? Workign in Daycare would constitute
education working wouldnt it? Or nonprofit?
"Carl G" cgerving@ecenetDOTcom wrote in message
...
Hi again
We wnt to build a total new pc , but keep her old hard drives (2) ,that
way we don't have to worry about cleaning them out or distroying
them.She does a daycare buisness and keeps all her records on the pc,she
has 2 hard drives now, one with windows on and the other for storage,+
the my documents folder.
Thanks

--
Carl G
"CWatters" wrote in message
...

"Carl G" cgerving@ecenetDOTcom wrote in message
...
Hi guys
If i buy a microsoft OEM version of XP Home ,can i transfer it from
one pc
to another like i would be able to do with a upgrade copy.
I want to install xp on my daughters pc now but in the near future she
wants
to build a new pc.
So can we transfer the oem copy to the new home built pc.She has home
built
pc now,wants a bigger one.
Thanks

I might be wrong but I believe the official view is no. Once an OEM
copy has
been activated on one PC you can't reactivate it on another.

However I believe you get 30 days to activate an installation so you
could
always install it for 30 days and then move it to another PC. Just
don't
activate it by accident when if prompts you.

I guess that is the wave of capitalism. Immigrants came to America because
of capitalism in Europe and now the wave is going to happen again in a
different sort of fashion. I think, it should be constitutional that
companies should disclose their financial balances to the public. Not only
discretely but publish them so the customer gets a real view of how much
they are actually suffering. How much money they save via their offshoring.
This of course is sort of relevent, but i can connect it, one of the major
freedoms in democracy is the freedom of information, yet it has been almost
stamped out. The good information America needs to know, is, how much
companies are saving in dollars by exporting jobs, and how much americans
are losing as a result of this. Why do people think so many people own
Dells? I give one figure, i do not know anybody who has bought their Dell
all at once. I know a lot of people with Dells and none of them bought it
at once. They all have financed their Dells. Look back in history folks,
companies will milk your jobs away and have you living check to check so
their interest rates will grow. People in Europe back in the day were in
debt. Communism came into action via poverty and debt. The people were so
in debt to their landlords they were never going to get out, so what the
hell if a different regime came in and said, we will kick the landlords off
your land and they wont be able to vote! That is why the middle class is
vital for stability. It will go down and down but to a point, something
always breaks. the disappearance of the middle class will be that what the
corporations really need to fear.
Hitler came to power in the times during the reparations. It was a big
pull in the bolshevik revolution that overtook and killed the Czars. It is
all about the monopolisticness that gets people on edge. The Russian czar
was related to the english monarch and germans! Competition is vital, when
corporations consolidate it may be good in the short term but it is going to
suck in the long one. If Micrsoft had REAL competition, not just 5% it
would be a different story. they can do what they please because there is
not really anything much else out there. These liscence schemes are not
going to get any better, but they are going to get worse.
the ole, trickle down illusion oh sorrry theory. Just doesnt work.
give corporations tax breaks and they will offshore their employment.
"mrpsychology" wrote in message
...
yeah microsoft is enjoying their battles in Europe lol.
"kurttrail" wrote in message
...
BBUNNY wrote:
Alias wrote:
"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote

None of this is relevant - when you install the product to the
computer or the computer that you first place the hardware in etc
it becomes part of that computer for licensing terms.

Of course, MS doesn't really define what a new computer is. If I
were the OP, I would make sure that something, even a screw, came
from the old computer and I would call it upgrading and I could
then legally use the OEM I paid for and not have to enrich MS'
coffers by buying the OS again to use on ONE computer.

That is the way that the EULA reads. _Hardware_

The RTM pre-SP1 version of OEM XP reads that way. MS changed it to
COMPUTER for SP1, because of all the sh*t it got in their public
newsgroups. And I was one of the most prolific sh*t-throwers!

Now, the way OEM XP SP1 and later EULAs read, it denies the reality terms
of sale for those that buy generic OEM XP with a hardware component.

The idiots at MS Legal should be fired, as the EULA asks people to agree
to terms post-sale, that are in direct contradiction with the actual
terms of the sale at the time of the sale.

Even a business would stand a good chance of winning, if MS ever tried to
enforce their OEM 1st install Computer Only term by pursuing it in court,
that is if that business could afford the time and money to fight MS!

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

my apologies. Sometimes i leap for the chance to shout out abstractions in
psychology and philosophy. and microsoft is like a lone hungry shark
finding a dead whale there is just so much to grab at!!!!!
"Leythos" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 16:18:43 -0500, mrpsychology wrote:

just because someone has criticisms on liscensing does not imply they
are not obiding by them. That is what you call dichotimized political
skewing.

No, it's what I call prior experience with the person that I replied too.

Good political strategy, 'oh person G is complaining about privacy
rights? He must be a criminal or doing something wrong. This implies
that only the criminal wants privacy. So therefore, people are afraid
to want privacy because they unknowingly pick up the implication of oh
if i am for privacy that is going to lead people to think i am a
criminal. This is brilliant political strategy.

You don't understand the relationship of the two parties replying to each
other - I clearly understand what Alias was saying and he my statement,
you don't appear to understand that Alias and I have already had
conversations on this subject before. There was no assumptions on either
of our parts.



--

remove 999 in order to email me

"Leythos" wrote

OEM installs are "licensed" to the first computer they are
installed on,
there is no moving the "License" to another computer
according to the OEM
license.

Moving your License from the old computer, no matter what
shape the
computer is in, to a new computer, violates the license
agreement.

Ah... but what is an "old computer" and what is a "new
computer"? If a part of my existing computer fails and I
replace it, do I have a "new computer"?. Suppose my power
cord frazzles and I have to replace it. Do I have "another"
computer? Is my OEM license now invalid?

--
Bob
Kanyak's Doghouse
http://www.kanyak.com

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]"
wrote in message
The OEM install of Windows XP is tied to the first
Computer it is installed to.

Define "first Computer" please.

(I would have said "is installed on" but WTH...)

--
Bob
Kanyak's Doghouse
http://www.kanyak.com

"mrpsychology" wrote in message
...
So, individuals cant get academic software? Not students? Actually, that
bringts a spontaneous question, does it exlcude high school students?
whatr would make high school nonacademic? And then you would be suing the
pants off all the schools selling academic versins to students in college
lol.

I never mentioned anyone not being able to buy academic licenses.
I only answered the part about non profit as that seems to be the area the
question was focused on.
Of course we do academic licensing
I would have assumed you could have found yourself the entire sections on
Academic licensing for indiviuals and larger bodies.
Here are some link to start from for any interested parties.

http://www.microsoft.com/Education/Eligible.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/Education/H...stitution.aspx



--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"mrpsychology" wrote in message
...
So, individuals cant get academic software? Not students? Actually, that
bringts a spontaneous question, does it exlcude high school students?
whatr would make high school nonacademic? And then you would be suing the
pants off all the schools selling academic versins to students in college
lol.
"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote in message
...
"mrpsychology" wrote in message
...
Now, doesnt microsoft have academic pricing and as well people who work
in the field of education as well? Workign in Daycare would constitute
education working wouldnt it? Or nonprofit?

see
The Microsoft Open License Charity program allows eligible nonprofit
organizations to acquire multiple software licenses-rather than multiple
software packages-at reduced prices
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/p...encharity.mspx

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"mrpsychology" wrote in message
...
Now, doesnt microsoft have academic pricing and as well people who work
in the field of education as well? Workign in Daycare would constitute
education working wouldnt it? Or nonprofit?
"Carl G" cgerving@ecenetDOTcom wrote in message
...
Hi again
We wnt to build a total new pc , but keep her old hard drives (2) ,that
way we don't have to worry about cleaning them out or distroying
them.She does a daycare buisness and keeps all her records on the
pc,she has 2 hard drives now, one with windows on and the other for
storage,+ the my documents folder.
Thanks

--
Carl G
"CWatters" wrote in message
...

"Carl G" cgerving@ecenetDOTcom wrote in message
...
Hi guys
If i buy a microsoft OEM version of XP Home ,can i transfer it from
one pc
to another like i would be able to do with a upgrade copy.
I want to install xp on my daughters pc now but in the near future
she
wants
to build a new pc.
So can we transfer the oem copy to the new home built pc.She has home
built
pc now,wants a bigger one.
Thanks

I might be wrong but I believe the official view is no. Once an OEM
copy has
been activated on one PC you can't reactivate it on another.

However I believe you get 30 days to activate an installation so you
could
always install it for 30 days and then move it to another PC. Just
don't
activate it by accident when if prompts you.

"Opinicus" wrote in message
...
"Leythos" wrote

OEM installs are "licensed" to the first computer they are installed on,
there is no moving the "License" to another computer according to the OEM
license.

Moving your License from the old computer, no matter what shape the
computer is in, to a new computer, violates the license agreement.

Ah... but what is an "old computer" and what is a "new computer"? If a
part of my existing computer fails and I replace it, do I have a "new
computer"?. Suppose my power cord frazzles and I have to replace it. Do I
have "another" computer?

Read section 1.2 (at least in the later versions) of the EULA for OEM
Windows XP.

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"Opinicus" wrote in message
...
"Leythos" wrote

OEM installs are "licensed" to the first computer they are installed on,
there is no moving the "License" to another computer according to the OEM
license.

Moving your License from the old computer, no matter what shape the
computer is in, to a new computer, violates the license agreement.

Ah... but what is an "old computer" and what is a "new computer"? If a
part of my existing computer fails and I replace it, do I have a "new
computer"?. Suppose my power cord frazzles and I have to replace it. Do I
have "another" computer? Is my OEM license now invalid?

--
Bob
Kanyak's Doghouse
http://www.kanyak.com

"Opinicus" wrote in message
...
"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote in message
The OEM install of Windows XP is tied to the first Computer it is
installed to.

Define "first Computer" please.

(I would have said "is installed on" but WTH...)


See section 1.2 of the OEM EULA for Windwos XP (at least it is that section
in the later versions).

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"Opinicus" wrote in message
...
"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" wrote in message
The OEM install of Windows XP is tied to the first Computer it is
installed to.

Define "first Computer" please.

(I would have said "is installed on" but WTH...)

--
Bob
Kanyak's Doghouse
http://www.kanyak.com

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT] rote

Read section 1.2 (at least in the later versions) of the
EULA for OEM Windows XP.

Link please?

Personally I should be very happy if MS has resolved the
frazzled power cord issue as it applies to OEM licenses.

Bob



rds,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please
use these
newsgroups

"Opinicus" wrote in message
...
"Leythos" wrote

OEM installs are "licensed" to the first computer they
are installed on,
there is no moving the "License" to another computer
according to the OEM
license.

Moving your License from the old computer, no matter
what shape the
computer is in, to a new computer, violates the license
agreement.

Ah... but what is an "old computer" and what is a "new
computer"? If a part of my existing computer fails and I
replace it, do I have a "new computer"?. Suppose my power
cord frazzles and I have to replace it. Do I have
"another" computer? Is my OEM license now invalid?

Leythos wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 16:18:43 -0500, mrpsychology wrote:

just because someone has criticisms on liscensing does not imply they
are not obiding by them. That is what you call dichotimized
political skewing.

No, it's what I call prior experience with the person that I replied
too.

Good political strategy, 'oh person G is complaining about
privacy rights? He must be a criminal or doing something wrong.
This implies that only the criminal wants privacy. So therefore,
people are afraid to want privacy because they unknowingly pick up
the implication of oh if i am for privacy that is going to lead
people to think i am a criminal. This is brilliant political
strategy.

You don't understand the relationship of the two parties replying to
each other - I clearly understand what Alias was saying and he my
statement, you don't appear to understand that Alias and I have
already had conversations on this subject before. There was no
assumptions on either of our parts.

"My personal "Opinion" of what should be fair and not doesn't enter into
a
factual discussion."

That it was a "factual discussion" was more than an assumption on your
part, and that is based on my prior experience with was really is just
YOUR PERSONAL OPINION, that is NOT BASED ON FACT. Your whole argument
is based on the CLAIMS of the Licensor. The licensor is not a legal or
moral arbiter of its licensing CLAIMS. The license isn't a law unto
itself anymore than the licensor is the judge of how their licensing
terms are legally compiled with out not.

That's why SCO has to sue IBM and win before IBM has been proven to
violated the UNIX license. That's one of the reasons we have civil
courts, to settle disputes between parties. IBM didn't have to sue SCO
to do what they did, because as far as they were concerned they never
felt they did anything wrong. It is up to the Licensor, SCO, to try to
enforce their licensing claims by bringing IBM to court, and try to
convince a judge that their claims are enforceable. And ONLY if a judge
agrees with SCO and rules in their favor will IBM be factually and
legally guilty of violating the UNIX license.

Same goes for MS and their private non-commercial individual customers.
All I am doing is using the very expensive software that was legally
sold to me according to my interpretation of "fair use." And as long as
the post-sale shrink-wrap Licensor doesn't try to legally enforce its
licensing CLAIMS over my "fair use," I'll go on legally "fairly using"
my software and go off into the sunset!

1.) MS has no legally established right to know what I do with the
software that is legally sold to me for the private non-commercial use
in the privacy of my home.

2.) MS has no legally established right to use a post-sale shrink-wrap
license to strip any private non-commercial individual of their "fair
use" rights!

3.) MS has had nearly 13 years to use due diligence and established
both points 1 and 2 are their right in a court of law, but instead MS
has knowingly done everything possible to avoid exercising their
responsibility under due diligence by getting a court to enforce the One
Computer licensing claims that strip individuals of the "fair use"
rights in the privacy of their home!

PA and WGA are just a way to use marketing principles to convince people
into believing what MS has been totally unwilling to legally prove for
nearly 13 years, and thus shirking their responsibility under due
diligence.
All it is, is a FUD campaign to convince the uneducated consumer what MS
and the rest of the corporate software copyright elite are too afraid to
legally prove in a real court of law!

Until the BSA Trust gets the balls to sue an a private non-commercial
individual and win in a court of law, my claims to "fair use" are more
legally valid to me than their post-sale shrink-wrap licensing claims,
and I have every legal and moral right to follow my interpretation until
the corporate software copyright elite legally prove otherwise, if they
can, and I am definitely not convinced that they would win, even if they
ever do grow some balls some time in the distant future!

When it comes to the post-sale shrink-wrap licensing of software and
private non-commercial individuals, there are no facts, just claims, so
when it comes down to it, it's up to each individual to decide for
themselves which claims apply to them in the privacy of their own home,
the corporate software copyright elite, or their own understanding of
their privacy rights and fair use rights in their own home!

You can claim that MS's EULA is totally factual until you are blue in
the face, but all you do is show how out of touch with reality, both
legally and morally, that you really are!

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

Shows how creative logic is lol. Microsoft itself is using creative
rationales to make their points that are in no way any worse than anyone
else. The mediator is the courts that allow for them to do so. If
Microsoft would be able to, they would force people to upgrade and
deliscence windows after a point of time and make people pay yearly. lol.
"Opinicus" wrote in message
...
"Mike Brannigan [MSFT] rote

Read section 1.2 (at least in the later versions) of the EULA for OEM
Windows XP.

Link please?

Personally I should be very happy if MS has resolved the frazzled power
cord issue as it applies to OEM licenses.

Bob



rds,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"Opinicus" wrote in message
...
"Leythos" wrote

OEM installs are "licensed" to the first computer they are installed
on,
there is no moving the "License" to another computer according to the
OEM
license.

Moving your License from the old computer, no matter what shape the
computer is in, to a new computer, violates the license agreement.

Ah... but what is an "old computer" and what is a "new computer"? If a
part of my existing computer fails and I replace it, do I have a "new
computer"?. Suppose my power cord frazzles and I have to replace it. Do
I have "another" computer? Is my OEM license now invalid?