XP license to 2nd computer legal?

David Maynard nospam private.net wrote:

Conor wrote:

In article 127ch3mmr1f3v19 corp.supernews.com, David Maynard
says...


And how do you arrive at this "legally, already have a right to
use" theory?


Because Microsoft T&C are not the law.



No one said they were but that doesn't answer the question of
where the claimed 'legality' comes from.

You persistently argue that what Microsoft says is the law,
apparently Microsoft is the only voice you can hear. But in our
United States, doing things is legal unless there is a law against
it. That means you have to refer to something other than Microsoft's
EULA. I know you can't understand that, so I'm not trying to
enlighten you personally.









Path: newssvr12.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm05.news.prodigy. com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsco n06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!news-feed01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net!nntp.frontiernet.net !news*.tds.net.MISMATCH!newspeer.tds.net!216.168.1 .162.MISMATCH!sn-xt-sjc-02!sn-xt-sjc-10!sn-xt-sjc-01!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: David Maynard nospam private.net
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: XP license to 2nd computer legal?
Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 09:25:24 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: 127e3orc3fka3c4 corp.supernews.com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: e52118$t08$1 az33news01.freescale.net 1148492064.111859.37810 i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com prh972177kb0fbp43g72peduvtuqe4ac8t 4ax.com DEhdg.28$cA2.10 newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net 127ch3mmr1f3v19 corp.supernews.com MPG.1ee0c9ef29bae40798cb3f news.individual.net
In-Reply-To: MPG.1ee0c9ef29bae40798cb3f news.individual.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse supernews.com
Lines: 15
Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:466455

John Doe wrote:

David Maynard nospam private.net wrote:


Conor wrote:


In article 127ch3mmr1f3v19 corp.supernews.com, David Maynard
says...



And how do you arrive at this "legally, already have a right to
use" theory?


Because Microsoft T&C are not the law.



No one said they were but that doesn't answer the question of
where the claimed 'legality' comes from.


You persistently argue that what Microsoft says is the law,

I asked a question and made no declarative statement at all, much less the
one your imagination dreamed up.

Your inability to comprehend simple English is stunning.

apparently Microsoft is the only voice you can hear.

No, but I am able to read so when someone asks what the EULA says I am able
to tell them.

But in our
United States, doing things is legal unless there is a law against
it.

You've apparently never heard of contract law.

That means you have to refer to something other than Microsoft's
EULA.

And you imagine that 'other' would be what?

I know you can't understand that, so I'm not trying to
enlighten you personally.

Good, because you haven't gotten a thing right yet.

Carlos wrote:
I'm thinking of buying a laptop with XP Media Center, but would like to
instead install linux on that laptop and use XP Media Center on another
pc that has a tv tuner card to setup an HTPC.

Assuming I could get a clean copy of XP Media Center to install on the
2nd pc (as opposed to the oem disk that will come with the laptop) is it
legal to re-use the license since I will have paid for the OS and it
will only be running on one machine?

Depends on the license; I think the OEM licenses which come with PC's
are tied to that specific piece of hardware, defined as some combination
of processor and motherboard.

Rob

David Maynard writes:

The 'authority' that comes from two parties agreeing to the terms of a
contract.

Actually, the contract is a contract of adhesion. It isn't
necessarily wholly enforceable in consequence.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:

David Maynard writes:


The 'authority' that comes from two parties agreeing to the terms of a
contract.


Actually, the contract is a contract of adhesion. It isn't
necessarily wholly enforceable in consequence.


Well, one could argue that but whether it's 'actually' one might be
debatable (your qualifiers are well done, btw

The courts have mixed opinions on shrink wrap, especially 'no see till
after bought', licensing but, last I checked, the majority seem to be
upholding their validity. That may seem strange from a purely 'contract
law' viewpoint, considering the "meeting of the minds" principle, but
Patent and Copyright law assigns exclusive rights to the creator/owner and
they don't 'have' to do a blessed thing with it so, with the exception of
'Fair Use' (which doesn't apply in this case), there is little, or nothing,
for the minds to 'meet' about other than the person wanting permission to
'use' agreeing to the conditions the one with exclusive rights dictates, or
not use it.

It's the 'exclusive rights' assignment that potentially makes things a bit
different than the traditional "contract of adhesion" argument where, say,
an insurance company sends you a 100 page micro-film sized type 'contract'.
I.E. There's no presumption that the insurance company has 'exclusive rights'.

There are, of course, a bazillion other arguments that could be made, which
is what keeps lawyers in business.

On Thu, 25 May 2006 19:00:44 -0500, David Maynard
wrote:

mayayana wrote:

What I'm wondering is when Vista gets settled in as the
mainstream MS OS, and XP is not supported anymore, will MS still give
activation help for XP users? There still are people who use Win98 on
their old systems that can't run WinXP reliably. I have an old AMD
K6-2 that can't run WinXP, and works fine with Win98SE.
I can't help but see the activation thing as a way for MS to
force OS upgrades, and by doing so, forcing hardware upgrades as well.


Exactly. The activation was presented as a reasonable
protection of copyright, but it was actually a transition
from selling OS licenses to selling embedded Windows.
(Which is a step in the transition to renting software.)

MS gets paid a fee on every PC and they're making
a great deal of extra money from people who threw
away one computer, or lost their CD, and end up buying
another license for copyrighted material they they should,
lehgally, already have a right to use.

And how do you arrive at this "legally, already have a right to use" theory?

What you purchase is a use license. OEM is for use on the machine it's sold
with and Retail is transportable.


What about the question I posed (OP)? I buy retail. 6 years
from now, I try installing it to this PC, which can't run Windows
Vista because hardware just meets minimum WinXP requirements. Product
won't activate for either MS has taken the WinXP activation server
offline, or I just don't have internet access. I call MS to get
activation code. MS tells me they can't help because it's no longer
supported, and I have to buy Vista, or they can help me, but charge me
for tech support call ($35.00, or more).

Larry Roberts writes:

What about the question I posed (OP)? I buy retail. 6 years
from now, I try installing it to this PC, which can't run Windows
Vista because hardware just meets minimum WinXP requirements. Product
won't activate for either MS has taken the WinXP activation server
offline, or I just don't have internet access. I call MS to get
activation code. MS tells me they can't help because it's no longer
supported, and I have to buy Vista, or they can help me, but charge me
for tech support call ($35.00, or more).

That's the nightmare scenario, and it's all too probable.

It's also an illustration of how a licensing agreement could be held
unenforceable in certain respects. If you have no choice but to do
what the vendor tells you in order to continue your business/life,
then the license is a contract of adhesion and it may be possible to
set it aside.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Larry Roberts wrote:

On Thu, 25 May 2006 19:00:44 -0500, David Maynard
wrote:


mayayana wrote:


What I'm wondering is when Vista gets settled in as the
mainstream MS OS, and XP is not supported anymore, will MS still give
activation help for XP users? There still are people who use Win98 on
their old systems that can't run WinXP reliably. I have an old AMD
K6-2 that can't run WinXP, and works fine with Win98SE.
I can't help but see the activation thing as a way for MS to
force OS upgrades, and by doing so, forcing hardware upgrades as well.


Exactly. The activation was presented as a reasonable
protection of copyright, but it was actually a transition
from selling OS licenses to selling embedded Windows.
(Which is a step in the transition to renting software.)

MS gets paid a fee on every PC and they're making
a great deal of extra money from people who threw
away one computer, or lost their CD, and end up buying
another license for copyrighted material they they should,
lehgally, already have a right to use.

And how do you arrive at this "legally, already have a right to use" theory?

What you purchase is a use license. OEM is for use on the machine it's sold
with and Retail is transportable.



What about the question I posed (OP)? I buy retail. 6 years
from now, I try installing it to this PC, which can't run Windows
Vista because hardware just meets minimum WinXP requirements. Product
won't activate for either MS has taken the WinXP activation server
offline, or I just don't have internet access. I call MS to get
activation code. MS tells me they can't help because it's no longer
supported, and I have to buy Vista, or they can help me, but charge me
for tech support call ($35.00, or more).

It's really too hypothetical a question and I'm not a lawyer anyway. But
Microsoft says "Microsoft will also support the activation of Windows XP
throughout its life and will likely provide an update that turns activation
off at the end of the product's lifecycle so users would no longer be
required to activate the product."

http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/activation_faq.mspx

"johns" wrote in message
ups.com...
I don't know about "legal" .. Microsoft doesn't make laws,
but they would try to make you think they do .... but Bill
would say that since the OS is "bundled" with the laptop
at a greatly reduced fee, it is "legally" only a part of that
bundle. My experience is if you purchase a bundled OS,
it is pre-registered by the Vendor, and you are just
activating it in your name when you purchase the product.
I think that means you need to purchase an over the
counter OS that is not associated with a machine in
order to be able to re-install it to another machine when
ever you upgrade your hardware. I do that all the time,
and when I call Microsoft to re-register it, they do it
for me. Also, I've been able to do it from the install disk
if I have the system online. And I've been able to do
it after a re-install that way too ... you have to be
careful how you enter the numbers ... any typos, and
the re-install will fail, and you then have to call them.
All of this doesn't mean that some know-it-all won't
come screaming into this post swearing I'm wrong.
So I call Microsoft and ask whenever I do anything
like this, and they have always helped me do it, and
not one time have they refused. Only difference in
me and the rest of the world, is I am making Academic
purchases over the counter, and paying the extra cost
for the stand-alone OS. It is $130 as opposed to $80.
Confused ?

johns


so what you are saying is the retail version of xp, you can install on as
many pc as possible?

so what you are saying is the retail version of xp, you can install on as
many pc as possible?

You can legally install the full version ( as opposed
to OEM version) on any number of machines but
only one at a time. In other words, the full version
license is 1 copy of Windows licensed to you. Last I saw,
the MS EULA also said the license/CD could be resold
once, though I'm not sure whether that applies to XP.

This question came up recently in a VB group in regard
to Visual Studio. The consensus was that the license allows
VS to be sold. The EULA clearly states that. But that's
a different issue from whether Microsoft will accept
a new registration and support request from the person
who bought the software second-hand.

(Another interesting note: The one-resale limit is another
limitation that is probably not legal, since no such limit can
be imposed on things like books or music CDs in the US.)

But as johns was pointing out, it's more complex
with XP. If you install on a second machine you'll
need to call and get a new activation code. So you're
depending upon MS granting that your request is
valid. And since MS is "end-of-lifing" their OSs as
fast as they can get away with it, you also may not be
able to actually use your full license as long as you
want to. It's unlikely that they'll grant new activation
codes once XP is officially "no longer supported".