T
Timothy Daniels
"Carey Frisch [MVP]" fumed:
Are you a man or a woman?
*TimDaniels*
Are you a man or a woman?
*TimDaniels*
T
Timothy Daniels
Thank you for your comments, Robert. I personally detest software pirates
and I would turn one in immediately and without reservation, and I would not
purchase their wares. I also believe that Microsoft has a legal and ethical
claim against them. But making clones for use in the same machine does
not in any stretch of the imagination involve "piracy" or decreased revenue
to Microsoft, and to claim that it is both illegal and unethical (à la Ms. Frisch)
is purely and simply mis-representation. Apparently, Ms. Frisch thought she
was joining the SS when she became an MVP.
*TimDaniels*
and I would turn one in immediately and without reservation, and I would not
purchase their wares. I also believe that Microsoft has a legal and ethical
claim against them. But making clones for use in the same machine does
not in any stretch of the imagination involve "piracy" or decreased revenue
to Microsoft, and to claim that it is both illegal and unethical (à la Ms. Frisch)
is purely and simply mis-representation. Apparently, Ms. Frisch thought she
was joining the SS when she became an MVP.
*TimDaniels*
C
Carey Frisch [MVP]
Simply quoting the EULA as written:
From the Windows XP EULA:
1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access,
display and run 'one copy' of the Software on a single
computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other
device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not
be used by more than two (2) processors at any one
time on any single Workstation Computer.
--
Carey Frisch (a.k.a. Mr. Carey Frisch)
Microsoft MVP
Windows - Shell/User
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:
| Thank you for your comments, Robert. I personally detest software pirates
| and I would turn one in immediately and without reservation, and I would not
| purchase their wares. I also believe that Microsoft has a legal and ethical
| claim against them. But making clones for use in the same machine does
| not in any stretch of the imagination involve "piracy" or decreased revenue
| to Microsoft, and to claim that it is both illegal and unethical (à la Ms. Frisch)
| is purely and simply mis-representation. Apparently, Ms. Frisch thought she
| was joining the SS when she became an MVP.
|
| *TimDaniels*
From the Windows XP EULA:
1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access,
display and run 'one copy' of the Software on a single
computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other
device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not
be used by more than two (2) processors at any one
time on any single Workstation Computer.
--
Carey Frisch (a.k.a. Mr. Carey Frisch)
Microsoft MVP
Windows - Shell/User
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:
| Thank you for your comments, Robert. I personally detest software pirates
| and I would turn one in immediately and without reservation, and I would not
| purchase their wares. I also believe that Microsoft has a legal and ethical
| claim against them. But making clones for use in the same machine does
| not in any stretch of the imagination involve "piracy" or decreased revenue
| to Microsoft, and to claim that it is both illegal and unethical (à la Ms. Frisch)
| is purely and simply mis-representation. Apparently, Ms. Frisch thought she
| was joining the SS when she became an MVP.
|
| *TimDaniels*
J
Jim
To-date, no one has addressed my open question -- if I copy the XP partition
to another partition for backup purposes, I'm in violation of the EULA,
right? I just want to hear the MVPs make that claim, because at that point,
even the most strident of their supporters will jump ship. There's no way
that any MVP in this forum who is taking this LITERAL interpretation of the
EULA can deny that this MUST be their position!
Well, I got news for ya, most all the OEMs are in violation of the
EULA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Most install a second copy of the OS in
another partition for recovery purposes! Darn it, there goes your theory
What now? You mean MS let's the OEMs blatantly violate the EULA?
Jim
to another partition for backup purposes, I'm in violation of the EULA,
right? I just want to hear the MVPs make that claim, because at that point,
even the most strident of their supporters will jump ship. There's no way
that any MVP in this forum who is taking this LITERAL interpretation of the
EULA can deny that this MUST be their position!
Well, I got news for ya, most all the OEMs are in violation of the
EULA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Most install a second copy of the OS in
another partition for recovery purposes! Darn it, there goes your theory
What now? You mean MS let's the OEMs blatantly violate the EULA?
Jim
C
Carey Frisch [MVP]
Major OEMs install a recovery partition which contains
their customized Windows XP reinstallation files. That
partition is not a functioning Windows XP operating system.
--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows - Shell/User
Microsoft Community Newsgroups
news://msnews.microsoft.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:
| To-date, no one has addressed my open question -- if I copy the XP partition
| to another partition for backup purposes, I'm in violation of the EULA,
| right? I just want to hear the MVPs make that claim, because at that point,
| even the most strident of their supporters will jump ship. There's no way
| that any MVP in this forum who is taking this LITERAL interpretation of the
| EULA can deny that this MUST be their position!
|
| Well, I got news for ya, most all the OEMs are in violation of the
| EULA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Most install a second copy of the OS in
| another partition for recovery purposes! Darn it, there goes your theory
| What now? You mean MS let's the OEMs blatantly violate the EULA?
|
| Jim
their customized Windows XP reinstallation files. That
partition is not a functioning Windows XP operating system.
--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows - Shell/User
Microsoft Community Newsgroups
news://msnews.microsoft.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:
| To-date, no one has addressed my open question -- if I copy the XP partition
| to another partition for backup purposes, I'm in violation of the EULA,
| right? I just want to hear the MVPs make that claim, because at that point,
| even the most strident of their supporters will jump ship. There's no way
| that any MVP in this forum who is taking this LITERAL interpretation of the
| EULA can deny that this MUST be their position!
|
| Well, I got news for ya, most all the OEMs are in violation of the
| EULA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Most install a second copy of the OS in
| another partition for recovery purposes! Darn it, there goes your theory
| What now? You mean MS let's the OEMs blatantly violate the EULA?
|
| Jim
J
Jim
Not in all cases, for probably most, it's nothing more than an original
image of the XP installation as it came from the factory. All the recovery
CD does is delete the current partition and COPY that recovery partition in
its place, and whalla, you're back in business. For all intents and
purposes, that recovery partition *is* a functioning XP installation. The
OEMs *are* in violation of the EULA.
And I still haven't had received a clear answer, if I copy the XP partition
to another partition for backup purposes, am I in violation of the EULA?
Oh, btw, all those ppl using a RAID controller w/ mirroring? Guess what,
they're in violation too! Each HD is a DUPLICATE of the other, so at a
minimum, these ppl have at least two copies of XP installed on their
systems. Oh no! (it's getting messier and messier all the time, isn't it)
Jim
image of the XP installation as it came from the factory. All the recovery
CD does is delete the current partition and COPY that recovery partition in
its place, and whalla, you're back in business. For all intents and
purposes, that recovery partition *is* a functioning XP installation. The
OEMs *are* in violation of the EULA.
And I still haven't had received a clear answer, if I copy the XP partition
to another partition for backup purposes, am I in violation of the EULA?
Oh, btw, all those ppl using a RAID controller w/ mirroring? Guess what,
they're in violation too! Each HD is a DUPLICATE of the other, so at a
minimum, these ppl have at least two copies of XP installed on their
systems. Oh no! (it's getting messier and messier all the time, isn't it)
Jim
C
Carey Frisch [MVP]
Activation and Product Licensing Policies:
How many installations can be made with one product license?
Has this changed with the introduction of Product Activation?
The underlying principles of Microsoft's software licenses have not changed.
Microsoft's End User License Agreements (EULAs) have always stipulated
the number of PCs that software can be installed on. Product Activation does
not change that.
Microsoft product Activation Facts
http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/activation_faq.mspx
--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows - Shell/User
Microsoft Community Newsgroups
news://msnews.microsoft.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:
| Not in all cases, for probably most, it's nothing more than an original
| image of the XP installation as it came from the factory. All the recovery
| CD does is delete the current partition and COPY that recovery partition in
| its place, and whalla, you're back in business. For all intents and
| purposes, that recovery partition *is* a functioning XP installation. The
| OEMs *are* in violation of the EULA.
|
| And I still haven't had received a clear answer, if I copy the XP partition
| to another partition for backup purposes, am I in violation of the EULA?
|
| Oh, btw, all those ppl using a RAID controller w/ mirroring? Guess what,
| they're in violation too! Each HD is a DUPLICATE of the other, so at a
| minimum, these ppl have at least two copies of XP installed on their
| systems. Oh no! (it's getting messier and messier all the time, isn't it)
|
| Jim
How many installations can be made with one product license?
Has this changed with the introduction of Product Activation?
The underlying principles of Microsoft's software licenses have not changed.
Microsoft's End User License Agreements (EULAs) have always stipulated
the number of PCs that software can be installed on. Product Activation does
not change that.
Microsoft product Activation Facts
http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/activation_faq.mspx
--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows - Shell/User
Microsoft Community Newsgroups
news://msnews.microsoft.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:
| Not in all cases, for probably most, it's nothing more than an original
| image of the XP installation as it came from the factory. All the recovery
| CD does is delete the current partition and COPY that recovery partition in
| its place, and whalla, you're back in business. For all intents and
| purposes, that recovery partition *is* a functioning XP installation. The
| OEMs *are* in violation of the EULA.
|
| And I still haven't had received a clear answer, if I copy the XP partition
| to another partition for backup purposes, am I in violation of the EULA?
|
| Oh, btw, all those ppl using a RAID controller w/ mirroring? Guess what,
| they're in violation too! Each HD is a DUPLICATE of the other, so at a
| minimum, these ppl have at least two copies of XP installed on their
| systems. Oh no! (it's getting messier and messier all the time, isn't it)
|
| Jim
R
Ron Martell
Jim said:
For backup purposes, no.
For other purposes, such as for having two different usable copies of
the same Windows license available on the computer for use via a boot
manager, yes.
A RAID implementation is not necessarily a contravention of the EULA.
A RAID 1 configuration, where either is bootable by itself, would be a
contravention.
The term RAID means Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks, and it was
designed to give 100% uptime for mission critical data systems such as
those used by hospitals and medical services. One essential
component of a true RAID system is that failed disks are "hot
swappable" and the system will automatically rebuild the content of
the failed drive onto the replacement without interrupting operations.
Note that RAID 0, the very popular 2 disk "data striping" mode used on
many PCs, does not comply with this definition of RAID and therefore
is not really a true implementation of RAID.
Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
T
Timothy Daniels
"Ron Martell" weaved and danced:
You purposely left out the phrase "in the same machine".
*That* facet of the many-faceted EULA has never been
tested for enforeability and for good reason - it would fail
the Fair Usage test.
*TimDaniels*
You purposely left out the phrase "in the same machine".
*That* facet of the many-faceted EULA has never been
tested for enforeability and for good reason - it would fail
the Fair Usage test.
*TimDaniels*
R
Rick
Carey Frisch said:
I didn't reject it. I accept that the EULA does not permit me to do what I
was asking. Thank you for pointing that out. I also accept that it is easy
to circumvent the Windows registration by cloning my primary disk. What I do
from here is between me and my conscience, and you would do well to keep
your moral judgements of others to yourself.
M
Mak
"normal license" - no.
Exception: Volume License, - will let you "install and use up to two copies
of the software on one device." ("Software" being Desktop Operating System
here, i.e. WinXP Pro)
Taken (and verified by talking to MS licensing specialist through my MS
account manager) from: PUR_Oct2005.doc (PUR_Dec2005.doc now, once
downloaded).
can be download:
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/resources/downloads/default.mspx
Exception: Volume License, - will let you "install and use up to two copies
of the software on one device." ("Software" being Desktop Operating System
here, i.e. WinXP Pro)
Taken (and verified by talking to MS licensing specialist through my MS
account manager) from: PUR_Oct2005.doc (PUR_Dec2005.doc now, once
downloaded).
can be download:
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/resources/downloads/default.mspx
R
Robert Moir
Jim said:
No. Not as far as I know. Making a backup isn't making a copy for use.
You obviously didn't read my post where I said MVPs don't speak for
Microsoft and Microsoft doesn't speak for MVPs. Any interpreation of the
EULA offered by any MVP is the interpretation of one private individual, not
a legal opinion from a representative of any organisation.
I hope that clears up any misunderstanding you may have.
Regards
--
J
**JP
Carey - you are a DUMB ASS! Think about this subject real good asides from
the EULA!
the EULA!
J
**JP
Don't turn this into a character morality guilt trip bull shit.
CYou church going child molester.
CYou church going child molester.
J
**JP
You stated the EULA, NOWW don't state morality or provide your biblistic
thoughts onto others.
thoughts onto others.
J
**JP
Thanks for the EULA - but get off your trip on making feel like sinners or
crap like that - whata guilt trip. You are a character AND FREAK!
crap like that - whata guilt trip. You are a character AND FREAK!
R
Rick
Relax. Chill.
**JP said:
D
Dave Harry
Well there you go. One copy of the software.
You can make a copy the software only once.
<ducks>
You can make a copy the software only once.
<ducks>
T
Timothy Daniels
Carey Frisch said:
Thank YEW!! And notice the "and" in:
"You may install, use, access, display AND run 'one copy'.... "
It does *not* say:
"You may install, use, access, display OR run 'one copy'...."
That means that you may not have a situation wherein ALL
of the following conditions exist:
1) A successful installation has been made,
2) that installation is used,
3) that installation is accessed,
4) that installation displays data, and
5) that installation *runs*.
Since a clone is not a running copy until it is booted,
it cannot satisfy all of the above conditions. It is only
*RUNNABLE*.
Furthermore, the 1st copy is NOT RUNNING when the
clone is running. It is only *RUNNABLE*.
Since both the original and the clone cannot run at the
same time, the conditions prohibited by the EULA
do not exist and, therefore, there is NO VIOLATION.
*TimDaniels*
J
Jim
Timothy Daniels said:
Which has been my point all along, it's proposterous to claim that a
backup/clone is a violation, I can't run but one at any given time, so
what's the issue? It's the same machine, same hardware, same user, same
EVERYTHING. After all these postings, I *still* don't get the objections.
I'll say it again, either the EULA is whacked, the interpretations to the
contrary are whacked, or BOTH.
Jim