|
| 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. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#21
January 31st 05, 01:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Tom Scales wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Noel Paton wrote: wrote in message oups.com... The pc is a Compaq Deskpro EP/SB Series, 350Mhz Pentium 2. I do have a copy of Windows98(SE), but it is an OEM from a Dell machine. So that would make it even more difficult to put on the Compaq. Thanks. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. Not only more difficult - but also illegal! If the computer is mine, and the software(OS) is mine, then it is *not* illegal. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. Uh, yes it is. Read your license agreement. The Dell OEM OS stays with the Dell machine and is not transferable I don't have to. I know enough to know what is enforceable and what isn't as far as the law is concerned. Just because Dell's license agreement says something, doesn't make it illegal. If you were to buy a new car, and wanted the wheels from your first put on your new one, would it be illegal just because the old car's paperwork said the wheels are not to be used on any other vehicle? It may invalidate the warrantee, but that is a different issue. ***Dell's goal obviously is to inconvenience the consumer who buys another brand of pc. That is the reason for difficulty in installing the Dell version of Windows on a Gateway, Compaq, ect. But I've never had a problem putting the same OS on another one of my Dell PCs. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. 
|
|
#22
January 31st 05, 02:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#23
January 31st 05, 02:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message ps.com... Tom Scales wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Noel Paton wrote: wrote in message oups.com... The pc is a Compaq Deskpro EP/SB Series, 350Mhz Pentium 2. I do have a copy of Windows98(SE), but it is an OEM from a Dell machine. So that would make it even more difficult to put on the Compaq. Thanks. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. Not only more difficult - but also illegal! If the computer is mine, and the software(OS) is mine, then it is *not* illegal. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. Uh, yes it is. Read your license agreement. The Dell OEM OS stays with the Dell machine and is not transferable I don't have to. I know enough to know what is enforceable and what isn't as far as the law is concerned. Just because Dell's license agreement says something, doesn't make it illegal. If you were to buy a new car, and wanted the wheels from your first put on your new one, would it be illegal just because the old car's paperwork said the wheels are not to be used on any other vehicle? It may invalidate the warrantee, but that is a different issue. ***Dell's goal obviously is to inconvenience the consumer who buys another brand of pc. That is the reason for difficulty in installing the Dell version of Windows on a Gateway, Compaq, ect. But I've never had a problem putting the same OS on another one of my Dell PCs. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. Are you an attorney? I think not. The license is absolutely enforceable. It's not even particularly unusual. Tom
|
|
#24
January 31st 05, 04:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I hesitate to join in this slanging match. However.
You have bought a licence, which has certain conditions attached to it. Those conditions are enforceable at law under most jurisdictions. That depends on the license. If you buy the freehold on a house, you are almost certain to buy it with covenants attached. These may say, for arguments sake, that you cannot erect an advertising hoarding on the land. The covenant will certainly say that as a condition of sale that these restrictions will apply to all heirs, successors and other purchasers. If you then build a hoarding and one of the heirs or successors of the person or company who originally sold the house and land and imposed the covenant cares to go to law they will win, unless the covenant can be shown to be grossly unreasonable. very bad example. You cannot draw a parallel here, since this is so completely different than what we are talking about here. In the same way Microsoft will have imposed certain conditions on Dell, over and above those conditions in a retail licence, in granting them a licence to sell PC's with Windows installed. In exchange the licence would have been considerably cheaper than the cost of a retail licence, and Dell will have passed some of that saving onto yourself when you bought the Dell machine. The licence will require Dell to impose the conditions on the purchaser of the PC. At law these conditions are enforceable. This is not about Microsoft imposing restrictions on Dell. What is not enforceable is Dell imposing the restriction mentioned on the user. Whether Microsoft or Dell would actually come after you is another matter, it would depend upon them finding out and whether you were worth suing. So it might be better to keep schtoom as to what you do in the privacy of your own home. If I were you and I was in business, then I would look over my shoulder, from time to time. Well, I'm not in business, and you are paranoid. To expand on the car example. If your old car is totalled, and all you have left are the tires, you can still use them again. And no restrictions by Firestone imposed on Ford will give them the ability to enforce a rule that says you cannot use those tires anymore. The original Dell was crap, and the OS is all I have left of it. And since the pc I put it on also belongs to me, I intend to get the most out of it. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York.
|
|
#25
January 31st 05, 04:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Tom Scales wrote: wrote in message ps.com... Tom Scales wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Noel Paton wrote: wrote in message oups.com... The pc is a Compaq Deskpro EP/SB Series, 350Mhz Pentium 2. I do have a copy of Windows98(SE), but it is an OEM from a Dell machine. So that would make it even more difficult to put on the Compaq. Thanks. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. Not only more difficult - but also illegal! If the computer is mine, and the software(OS) is mine, then it is *not* illegal. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. Uh, yes it is. Read your license agreement. The Dell OEM OS stays with the Dell machine and is not transferable I don't have to. I know enough to know what is enforceable and what isn't as far as the law is concerned. Just because Dell's license agreement says something, doesn't make it illegal. If you were to buy a new car, and wanted the wheels from your first put on your new one, would it be illegal just because the old car's paperwork said the wheels are not to be used on any other vehicle? It may invalidate the warrantee, but that is a different issue. ***Dell's goal obviously is to inconvenience the consumer who buys another brand of pc. That is the reason for difficulty in installing the Dell version of Windows on a Gateway, Compaq, ect. But I've never had a problem putting the same OS on another one of my Dell PCs. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. Are you an attorney? I think not. The license is absolutely enforceable. It's not even particularly unusual. And I'm sure you aren't an attorney either, because you are still wrong. But none of this has anything to do with the original post anyway. So let's just continue to disagree. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York.
|
|
#26
January 31st 05, 07:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... I hesitate to join in this slanging match. However. You have bought a licence, which has certain conditions attached to it. Those conditions are enforceable at law under most jurisdictions. That depends on the license. The License terms have been tested in the US and the UK courts - and stand. If you buy the freehold on a house, you are almost certain to buy it with covenants attached. These may say, for arguments sake, that you cannot erect an advertising hoarding on the land. The covenant will certainly say that as a condition of sale that these restrictions will apply to all heirs, successors and other purchasers. If you then build a hoarding and one of the heirs or successors of the person or company who originally sold the house and land and imposed the covenant cares to go to law they will win, unless the covenant can be shown to be grossly unreasonable. very bad example. You cannot draw a parallel here, since this is so completely different than what we are talking about here. Not at all - Microsoft own the software - you only own a license! In the same way Microsoft will have imposed certain conditions on Dell, over and above those conditions in a retail licence, in granting them a licence to sell PC's with Windows installed. In exchange the licence would have been considerably cheaper than the cost of a retail licence, and Dell will have passed some of that saving onto yourself when you bought the Dell machine. The licence will require Dell to impose the conditions on the purchaser of the PC. At law these conditions are enforceable. This is not about Microsoft imposing restrictions on Dell. What is not enforceable is Dell imposing the restriction mentioned on the user. IT IS about Microsoft's terms and conditions - Dell merely act as a Vendor in law Whether Microsoft or Dell would actually come after you is another matter, it would depend upon them finding out and whether you were worth suing. So it might be better to keep schtoom as to what you do in the privacy of your own home. If I were you and I was in business, then I would look over my shoulder, from time to time. Well, I'm not in business, and you are paranoid. Neither of which would prevent you being prosecuted, should MS take such a step. To expand on the car example. If your old car is totalled, and all you have left are the tires, you can still use them again. And no restrictions by Firestone imposed on Ford will give them the ability to enforce a rule that says you cannot use those tires anymore. The original Dell was crap, and the OS is all I have left of it. And since the pc I put it on also belongs to me, I intend to get the most out of it. Experiences count for nothing in law - and the CD is legally worthless, and any install from it legally a no-no. The ONLY machine that CD was legally allowed to run on was the machine it came with. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. -- Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2005, Windows) Nil Carborundum Illegitemi http://www.btinternet.com/~winnoel/millsrpch.htm http://tinyurl.com/6oztj Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's
|
|
#27
January 31st 05, 08:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message ups.com... Tom Scales wrote: wrote in message ps.com... Are you an attorney? I think not. The license is absolutely enforceable. It's not even particularly unusual. And I'm sure you aren't an attorney either, because you are still wrong. But none of this has anything to do with the original post anyway. So let's just continue to disagree. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York. No, I'm not an attorney. I have, however, written over 200 software contracts, all in excess of $5m. You clearly don't understand software contract law. If you're going to steal it, then I'd stop posting my full name and city. MS might want to have some fun. And they WOULD win.
|
|
#28
January 31st 05, 11:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
No, I'm not an attorney. I have, however, written over 200 software
contracts, all in excess of $5m. You clearly don't understand software contract law. I don't have to. If you're going to steal it, then I'd stop posting my full name and city. MS might want to have some fun. And they WOULD win. No they wouldn't. I have no idea why you keep turning this thread into something it is not. I have stolen nothing, and have already stated that the copy of the (unregistered)window 98(SE) software we are talking about belongs to me. Darren Harris Staten Island, New York.
|
|
#30
February 1st 05, 02:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Todd H." wrote in message ... writes: I have stolen nothing, and have already stated that the copy of the (unregistered)window 98(SE) software we are talking about belongs to me. That's the point--no, no it doesn't "belong to you." You are a licensee. You bought the computer from dell, and with it came installed Microsoft software for which you were granted and accepted a restricted license to that software. One of the restrictions of OEM distributions of Windows is that it can't be legally used on other computers. Have you never read a license agreement? Or even what's on that CD label--it may even be on there. So, he's absolutely right, that you cannot legally put your Dell OEM copy of win98 on a non-Dell computer. Even if it's technically possible, it's still a breach of copyright. Best Regards, -- Todd H. http://www.toddh.net/ We're wasting our breath. He's convinced himself it is Ok because it is 'his' copy. It's not. He doesn't care. He'll rationalize it forever. Tom
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
