Activation code

[Alias]

That sentence makes absolutely no sense. Is English a second
language for you? There's certainly no logic or connection between the
two portions of the sentence. Or are you trying to say that the
legislative, executive, and judicial branches all need Microsoft's
permission to enact law?

MS says you can't do it. MS has yet to take anyone to court to enforce
their EULA. Get it now?

Irrelevant. We're not discussing Spanish courts' total disregard
for the intellectual property of others.

I am. It was taken to court here and MS LOST.

Nothing.

You just said think that the Spanish courts have a "total disregard for
the intellectual property of others" or did you copy and paste that
without thinking?

I'd inform them that this is a newsgroup primarily intended for
English speakers, and therefore the residents of English-speaking
countries, and that they'd have better success getting their specific
technical issues properly addressed in one of the Spanish language groups.

I'm a native English speaker. I live in Spain, as to hundreds of
thousands of other native English speakers. I use an English Windows XP
Pro. This is an international newsgroup.

Alias

 

[Steve N.]

No! You need to purchase a second license if you wish
to install Windows XP on a second computer.

It is clearly a violation of the EULA to install the same Windows XP
license on a second computer without removing Windows XP from
the original computer.

Please read the EULA by going to Start > Run and type: WINVER
and hit enter.

You then must click on the End User License Agreement link.

Less steps to go to Start, Run type in EULA.TXT and hit Enter.

Steve

 

[Carey Frisch [MVP]]

I'm sorry the "trolls" jumped in on this thread.
Their primary purpose is to spew misleading
and dishonest information and twist the facts
to confuse law-biding folks as yourself.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User
Microsoft Newsgroups

Get Windows XP Service Pack 2 with Advanced Security Technologies:
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/choose.mspx

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

:

| I'm sorry I asked !
|
| Ben H
|

 

[bonio]

No! You need to purchase a second license if you wish
to install Windows XP on a second computer.

It is clearly a violation of the EULA to install the same Windows XP
license on a second computer without removing Windows XP from
the original computer.

Please read the EULA by going to Start > Run and type: WINVER
and hit enter.

Ah, f**k off Frisch, you miserable sycophant!

 

[kurttrail]

There is no mention of "fair use in the privacy of one's home"
in the Windows XP End-User License Agreement. Please refrain
from encouraging others to violate the legal provisions of the
EULA.

Exactly! MS is using its EULA terms to stop "fair use" by trying to
limit an individual from installing and using XP on more than one
computer.

--
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"

 

[Bruce Chambers]

Bruce Chambers wrote:



MS says you can't do it. MS has yet to take anyone to court to enforce
their EULA. Get it now?

No. You're still not talking sense. It's as if we're discussing two
completely separate and unrelated subjects, with me being the one
sticking to the topic of the thread. But I'll join your digression for
a moment - Why should Microsoft need to take anyone to court to
establish something that's already been upheld in Federal Court? See
Procd, Inc. v. Zeidenberg,
http://www.law.emory.edu/7circuit/june96/96-1139.html. EULAs have been
found to be legally binding contracts, until proven otherwise. Name a
relevant American case where Microsoft's EULA has been found to be
invalid. You can't, can you?

I am.

Ah, using the same, worn out tactic of changing the subject as Kurt.
If it doesn't work for him, why would you think it would work for you?

You just said think that the Spanish courts have a "total disregard for
the intellectual property of others" or did you copy and paste that
without thinking?

By "nothing," I meant that I give no weight or value to the statement.
But I can see how this might have confused you. I'll try to keep
things simpler or clearer in the future.

I'm a native English speaker.

No offense intended, but it certainly doesn't seem so, at times.

I live in Spain, as to hundreds of
thousands of other native English speakers.

I'm tempted to ask why, but it's your decision, and none of my business.

I use an English Windows XP
Pro.

That seems counter-productive. If your going to adopt the mores of the
culture in which you choose to live, wouldn't it make more sense to also
use its language? Seems like you'd miss out on a lot by keeping
yourself isolated from your adopted culture.

This is an international newsgroup.

True, but, as I said, intended for English speaking nations, and their
citizens.



--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH

 

[kurttrail]

Actually, you've fallen for one of Kurt's biggest lies. The Microsoft
EULA in no way infringes upon one's "fair use" of the OS, as the term
"fair use" is defined by law.

Try reading something that Kurt wouldn't want you to see, the true,
legal definition of "fair use."

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/index.html

F*^K you Bruce. I just used that site in a reply to you before reading
your post here in this thread!

http://groups-beta.google.com/group..._frm/thread/4cf8971dae3f6620/368f7c1ab4daaf92
http://groups-beta.google.com/group..._frm/thread/dd9de4fc1d75f061/a5494728e0a4b473
http://groups-beta.google.com/group..._frm/thread/612ea621d5481b41/118c02ce14f295f4
http://groups-beta.google.com/group..._frm/thread/18b1de6c588d39a4/76e34f3e3f480fda
http://groups-beta.google.com/group..._frm/thread/554ac683ad8763b7/a929993250639979

And here is the Google Archive of past times where I responded to the
use of the Stanford Fair Use site by YOU or brought it up to you myself!

And I bet like these past instances, you won't respond to me in the "ok,
let's clear this up MS - is Product Activation really restricted?"
either.

--
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"

 

[Steve N.]

I'm sorry I asked !

Ben H

LOL!

Welcome to the never ending EULA vs. Copyright law debate.

Steve

 

[kurttrail]

No. You're still not talking sense. It's as if we're discussing two
completely separate and unrelated subjects, with me being the one
sticking to the topic of the thread. But I'll join your digression
for a moment - Why should Microsoft need to take anyone to court to
establish something that's already been upheld in Federal Court?

Show us a case where a shrink-wrap licensed copy of COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL
has been upheld OVER COPYRIGHT LAW!

See
Procd, Inc. v. Zeidenberg,
http://www.law.emory.edu/7circuit/june96/96-1139.html. EULAs have
been found to be legally binding contracts, until proven otherwise.

That was a case of the commercial use and resale of a commercial
database! Has absolutely nothing to do with the private non-commercial
use of post-sale shrink-wrapped licensed copyrighted material by an
individual!

A database is NOT copyrighted material!
Zeidenberg copied the database, repackaged the database at a cut-rate
price for sale to others.

If you read further in the Appellate court opinion, you would have read:

"Whether there are legal differences between "contracts" and "licenses"
(which may matter under the copyright doctrine of first sale) is a
subject for another day."

ROFL! So you see, Zeidenberg had nothing to do with COPYRIGHTED
MATERIAL, FAIR USE, COPYRIGHT LAW when it comes to the enforceability of
commercial use post-sale license terms on private, non-commercial
individuals!

Name a relevant American case where Microsoft's EULA has been found
to be invalid. You can't, can you?

Nope. Because MS has yet to sue an private non-commercial individual
for breech of EULA in over 13 years since MS first introduced their One
Computer EULA term.

And that clearly demonstrates that MS has no intention of exercising its
due diligence responsibility to legally enforce its contractual terms,
in spite of MS knowing that individuals have breech the One Computer
EULA term!

This is valid justification for a judge to summarily dismiss a case of
breech of contract brought by MS against an individual if MS ever grows
the balls in the future!

Ah, using the same, worn out tactic of changing the subject as Kurt.
If it doesn't work for him, why would you think it would work for you?

Huh? He didn't change the subject at all. Why in the world would he be
arguing about laws and court rulings in a country he doesn't live in?

It is you changing the subject by bringing me into this!

By "nothing," I meant that I give no weight or value to the statement.
But I can see how this might have confused you. I'll try to keep
things simpler or clearer in the future.


No offense intended, but it certainly doesn't seem so, at times.

Why? Because he doesn't believe you bullsh*t!

<Snipped the rest>

--
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"

 

[kurttrail]

I'm sorry the "trolls" jumped in on this thread.
Their primary purpose is to spew misleading
and dishonest information and twist the facts
to confuse law-biding folks as yourself.

No you are just sorry, as you answer never directly addressed the OP's
question!

"I have read somewhere that Microsoft only keep activation codes in
their
database for 120 days. After that a CD product key can be used on
another
computer. Is this correct?" - OP

"No! You need to purchase a second license if you wish to install
Windows XP on a second computer." - Fairy Frisch

See! The PK can be used to install on another computer, IN REALITY!
Hell, IN REALITY, the PK can be use on another computer before the 120
period, by doing a phone activation!

But you MicroTrolls never answer about REALITY, only about what happens
in the MicroUniverse!

--
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"

 

[kurttrail]

Unless you were the one who was selling said operating system!

Only if you also believe that "fair use" is copyright piracy.

--
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"

 

[kurttrail]

especially the cost !!!

BUT if you only know the amount of effort put in to ensure the OS
runs with minimal bugs, then the price you pay for a legal copy is
chicken feed

And if you knew the net profit margin, you'd see that MS charges much
more than the fair return it is owed for the creative labor of its
employees.

"Microsoft's 86% Windows profit margin draws criticism from consumer
groups" - http://www.ananova.com/business/story/sm_711827.html?menu

"The limited scope of the copyright holder's statutory monopoly, like
the limited copyright duration required by the Constitution, reflects a
balance of competing claims upon the public interest: Creative work is
to be encouraged and rewarded, but private motivation must ultimately
serve the cause of promoting broad public availability of literature,
music, and the other arts. The immediate effect of our copyright law is
to secure a fair return for an 'author's' creative labor. But the
ultimate aim is, by this incentive, to stimulate artistic creativity for
the general public good. 'The sole interest of the United States and
the primary object in conferring the monopoly,' this Court has said,
'lie in the general benefits derived by the public from the labors of
authors' . . . . When technological change has rendered its literal
terms ambiguous, the Copyright Act must be construed in light of this
basic purpose." - http://laws.findlaw.com/us/422/151.html

--
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"

 

[Richard Urban]

So in effect you are saying Kurt, that if you were in Bill Gates
(Microsoft's) shoes, you would spend countless millions of dollars to
develop an operating system. Then you would press 1 (one) CD, put it out on
the street and allow everyone and anyone to copy that one CD to pass it
around. And you would do this and not be upset because you are not bringing
in any money.

Are you a bovine that eats grass for food and sleeps in a pasture. You had
better be because you will not make any money!

I, for one, wish that Microsoft "would" make a test case. Hell, if I knew it
would work I would even install a copy of pirated software on my system and
send them the proof! The fact is, they are banking on the concept that the
majority of people TRY to be honest - a concept you seem to have problems
with!

--
Regards,

Richard Urban

aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[kurttrail]

So in effect you are saying Kurt, that if you were in Bill Gates
(Microsoft's) shoes, you would spend countless millions of dollars to
develop an operating system. Then you would press 1 (one) CD, put it
out on the street and allow everyone and anyone to copy that one CD
to pass it around. And you would do this and not be upset because you
are not bringing in any money.

That is not a "fair use" and you SHOULD know that after all this time.

I don't advocate that people should share copyrighted material with
others!

I would press one CD for each household. Businesses would have to
follow commercial use terms.

Are you a bovine that eats grass for food and sleeps in a pasture.
You had better be because you will not make any money!

I, for one, wish that Microsoft "would" make a test case. Hell, if I
knew it would work I would even install a copy of pirated software on
my system and send them the proof! The fact is, they are banking on
the concept that the majority of people TRY to be honest - a concept
you seem to have problems with!

"Fair Use" is honest and LEGAL!

From the Supreme Court's betamax decision:

"Any individual may reproduce a copyrighted work for a "fair use"; the
copyright owner does not possess the exclusive right to such a use."

If they wanted to limit that statement to only the timeshifting issue of
the betamax case the wouldn't have use the generic term of "copyrighted
work." Instead it was part of their rationale of why a videotape
recorder wasn't a violation of copyright law.

MS doesn't possess the right to limit my "fair use." No Copyright Owner
does according to the Supreme Court!

--
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"

 

[kurttrail]

LOL!

Welcome to the never ending EULA vs. Copyright law debate.

This is the song that never ends.
It just goes on and on my friends.
Somebody started singing it not knowing what it was,
and they'll continue singing it forever just because,

(start at top again, & again, & again, & again . . . . )

--
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"

 

[Richard Urban]

One per household goes too far. I can certainly agree that maybe you should
be allowed to install the O/S on a maximum of two computers (but that is
Microsoft's decision to make - not yours or mine). But one per household?
Hell, I know of one family that has about 15 computers between 4 different
places of residence. I maintain these computers, or at least a good number
of them. Does your concept extend that far, just because they are brothers
and sisters? When does it stop?

A three year old child goes into a candy store and picks up a pack of gum.
What is the first thing he does. He hands it to mom/dad, because even at
that young age he knows that you have to buy things. You just can't take
them. And, unless Microsoft allows it - you are "taking" it.

Maybe the people at Microsoft are just a gang of thieves! I don't know. But
I do know that because they developed the O/S (and any other software) they
sell, "they have the legal right to charge for it"! They also have the
"legal" right to charge what the market will bear! And they certainly have
the legal right to maximize profits for their stock holders.

Since Linux has come out there is nothing forcing a computer user to
subsidize Microsoft by buying their software. There are many who would build
them a system either without an O/S, or with Linux installed - including me!
But wow, that takes a bit of work to find someone who will do this! So they
buy a Dell and complain afterwards that the O/S was forced upon them.
Hogwash I say!

I do know that the poor 3 year old does not stand a chance in the world of
growing up honest if he has a parent who advocates thievery. And until
Microsoft, or the courts, say otherwise - it IS thievery!


--
Regards,

Richard Urban

aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Alias]

That seems counter-productive. If your going to adopt the mores of
the culture in which you choose to live, wouldn't it make more sense to
also use its language? Seems like you'd miss out on a lot by keeping
yourself isolated from your adopted culture.

I have three machines, Home Spanish, Pro Spanish and Pro English. I have
the two pros hooked up to the same mouse, keyboard and monitor. My
keyboard is Spanish but set to change from one language to another. Who
says I adopted the Spanish culture? You have no idea how I live.

True, but, as I said, intended for English speaking nations, and
their citizens.

Nations and citizens? So ex pats are banned, according to you? How
cyberlyxenophobic and nationalistic of you.

Heh.

Alias, thinking that one of the benefits of the Internet is the
intermingling of cultures ...

 

[Alias]

Richard Urban wrote:
And until

Microsoft, or the courts, say otherwise - it IS thievery!

And it's rampant. From XP on down, MS' OSs were casually copied. Office
too. Installed by white box people on new computers, etc. Even so, Billy
is not bovine or eating grass but quickly becoming the first
trillionaire in the world.

Alias

 

[Scott]

I agree on the one copy per household Kurt. But further to this
copyright BS. If it is illegal to copy software, then why are
companies such as Sony to name one, allowed to legally sell machines
such as: DVD, CD burners. DVD copy/players for your living room, PVR
machines for tv signals...all of these are copyrighted, and yet the
machines exist....On the one hand every company whines about pirates,
and on the other they produce and sell machines for that purpose...Go
figure!

 

[Stephen]

Windows Product Activation [WPA] was put in Windows to prevent casual
copying by the home and small business user. It is not meant to thwart the
dedicated pirates, just the casual pirates. The dedicated pirates don't deal
with WPA, they deal with the police. Microsoft, like any other company, has
the right to protect its intellectual property. Now with WPA, you don't need
to activate a retail copy for thirty days and it resets after 120 days, so
you can't say Microsoft isn't trying to be generous vis a vis the tinkerer.

I can only advise you to pay Microsoft some money for every copy of Windows
you use on a distinct computer.

People [and by extension companies] who write software should be compensated
for their efforts, it's fair.