XP OEM - Interesting conversation with MS employee

On Wed, 25 May 2005 02:38:31 GMT, Leythos
wrote:

In article ,
says...
You are NEVER gonna convince Lameboy that the EULA is anything but God's
Laws. A burning bush gave the EULA to Billses on stone tablets.

I was not addressing it's validity, and my reply had nothing to do with
it.

He said people could not read the EULA before purchasing the product or
opening the box, which is not true - it's on-line and you can request a
copy if you call MS.


.... and you don't see a problem with that.
There is a problem with that, but you ignore it. The online
EULA is fine if it's required prior to online purchase, but
is no substitute for a EULA at the time and place of
purchase since what is actually being purchased is only a
license.



There is a difference between being in INFORMED customer and an Ignorant
one, the choice is up to the customer as the information IS available
without purchase.

Yes, an informed customer is one who is able to read the
terms attached to the specific product, not going elsewhere
to guess if they apply to a specific product.

On Wed, 25 May 2005 10:55:18 GMT, Leythos
wrote:

In article , "David Candy" .
says...
Why would one go to a company that one has no relationship with. The OEM
issues the license not Microsoft. The EULA is between the user and the OEM
(not so on retail and upgrade - it's MS on those versions, but they a minute
portion of MS sales).

Also the sale takes place before the EULA screen shows.

The licensing of the software, the requirement for it, is, when a
packaged machine is purchased from a place like CompUSA, Gateway, etc...
included in the manual that ships with the boxes. There is also wording
on the CD in many cases.

Again, you/they can choose to be ignorant or not.


You are choosing to be ignorant and it's a bit ridiculous
that you keep trying to imply the customer is. On the
contrary, they choose to KNOW what the license is for that
specific product- not some license that has no guarantee of
applying to a product found elsewhere. Your oversimplified
concept of "ignorance" can't be applied to actual purchase
scenarios, but would have to apply to ALL of them to be a
workable solution. There can be no "grey areas" in whether
one knows the terms of a the specific product but there are.

On Wed, 25 May 2005 02:19:11 GMT, Leythos
wrote:

In article ,
says...
You still don't get it. The buyer is only ignorant because
of MS' neglecting to disclose terms. MS has hidden the
terms and should be forthcoming. You try to shift blame
when I already stated an obvious solution- a packaging that
discloses the terms.

MS Didn't hide anything, you can get all the information even before you
purchase the OS/System.

--

No, you can't.
Be specific, show us this information that is _GUARANTEED_
in writing sufficient to hold up in court, that it applies
to some randomly-selected (as would occur when one comes
across a product) WIndows. The terms are not consistent
across all distributions of WIndows and therefore can not be
"gotten" and assumed to apply to a product which can't be
verified before purchase to have same (terms).

On Wed, 25 May 2005 16:53:32 GMT, Leythos
wrote:


No, you can't.
Be specific, show us this information that is _GUARANTEED_
in writing sufficient to hold up in court, that it applies
to some randomly-selected (as would occur when one comes
across a product) WIndows. The terms are not consistent
across all distributions of WIndows and therefore can not be
"gotten" and assumed to apply to a product which can't be
verified before purchase to have same (terms).

When did I mention anything about court

If it doesn't hold up on court then your idea about EULA or
terms is pretty irrelevant, isn't it? What ARE customers
agreeing to then? NOTHING if it doesn't stand up to legal
definitions.


- your statement was that people
purchased a computer/system with Windows without any means to read the
EULA before the purchase and that it made the return of Windows
impossible or highly unlikely for those that do not agree to the EULA.

Not impossible, BUT any additional effort or expense is not
same thing as being able to reject it without any additional
burden, as is the case with any other agreement where terms
are disclosed at THAT time, not elsewhere, "maybe".


Your statement is 100% false, the information IS available to those that
don't want to purchase blindly.

Oh? Show me. Show us all where we can be GUARANTEED we'd
reading something that applies to any SPECIFIC
possible-to-purchase product.



I don't give a sh!t about legal or not, only that your inflammatory
statement was false - the EULA is available BEFORE purchase to any
customer that chooses to be informed.

No, it's not always and often not available. Even if you
can read "something" you are not guaranteed what you read
applies. When you purchase a license there must be some
fixation of terms at the time and point of entering into
that agreement, not beforehand via a 3rd party nor after the
sale.

Leythos wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Wed, 25 May 2005 02:19:11 GMT, Leythos
wrote:

In article ,
says...
You still don't get it. The buyer is only ignorant because
of MS' neglecting to disclose terms. MS has hidden the
terms and should be forthcoming. You try to shift blame
when I already stated an obvious solution- a packaging that
discloses the terms.

MS Didn't hide anything, you can get all the information even
before you purchase the OS/System.

--

No, you can't.
Be specific, show us this information that is _GUARANTEED_
in writing sufficient to hold up in court, that it applies
to some randomly-selected (as would occur when one comes
across a product) WIndows. The terms are not consistent
across all distributions of WIndows and therefore can not be
"gotten" and assumed to apply to a product which can't be
verified before purchase to have same (terms).

When did I mention anything about court - your statement was that
people purchased a computer/system with Windows without any means to
read the EULA before the purchase and that it made the return of
Windows impossible or highly unlikely for those that do not agree to
the EULA.

Your statement is 100% false, the information IS available to those
that don't want to purchase blindly.

I don't give a sh!t about legal or not, only that your inflammatory
statement was false - the EULA is available BEFORE purchase to any
customer that chooses to be informed.

Yeah, like the Earth had available that it was going to be destroyed to
make way for a hyperspatial bypass in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the
Galaxy!

--
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"

Leythos wrote:
In article ,
says...
No, it's not always and often not available. Even if you
can read "something" you are not guaranteed what you read
applies.

You're hopeless.

Said the Queen of the delusional!

--
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"

On Wed, 25 May 2005 18:35:27 GMT, Leythos
wrote:

In article ,
says...
No, it's not always and often not available. Even if you
can read "something" you are not guaranteed what you read
applies.

You're hopeless.


That's ironic.