Stolen machine, who owns software?

[kurttrail]

That CD may not work with another machine because it was arranged to
work only with the machine with which it came & was stolen.

Salutations

That MAY be true with the OS, but I've never seen that from Office, and
the PK are usually a sticker on the CD cover.

--
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]

If the software was retail and you have the CDs, Product Keys etc, the
software is yours.
If the software was OEM, it was stolen with the computer whether you
have the CDs, keys or not.

Only in some demented MS created virtual reality! In fact, the copies
of software are still in the possession of its rightful owners, and the
only thing stopping this business from using the software is MS's
Nightmare on EULA Street!

Simply include the software on the insurance claim.

And If the Insurance company asks if they still are in position of the
software, how do you suggest the OP answer?

What if the theft is less than the deductible?

It ain't as simple as you suggest, Juppy.

If the software was included with the computer system, the software
is part of the total cost anyways.

So because of MS's BS EULA, though the copy of software is not stolen
this business is victimized a second time, and can't use the software it
still has.

--
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"

 

[Kerry Brown]

Don't know about you, but the major OEMs I've had to deal with, barely
supported the OEM software on the computers that it was sold with.

MS should just say in its EULA that installation on another computer will
not be supported. Hell, even with their retail software, MS's tech
support is not worth all the extra cash MS charges for it.

I agree major OEM support sucks. That is how I stay in business. I support
what I sell. A lot of my customers are former Dell/HP/Gateway customers who
got tired of having a tech tell them: "You'll have to restore your system to
the factory settings".

Kerry

 

[R. McCarty]

Front-Line OEM support is bad. I tell customers to avoid calling.
Many times these Reinstall/Recovery/-Uninstall mantras leave the
machine in worse shape. 2nd worst thing is the "Shuffle Game",
call Dell, who sends you to Microsoft, who returns you to Dell.

At least soon, the Bangalore Dell center will answer with American
names and speak "Texan". Forget enhancing their Technical skills,
just teach them Slang/inflection and hand out Stetsons to replace
the their traditional headwear.

 

[kurttrail]

I agree major OEM support sucks. That is how I stay in business. I
support what I sell. A lot of my customers are former Dell/HP/Gateway
customers who got tired of having a tech tell them: "You'll have to
restore your system to the factory settings".

Unfortunately, for every small shop like you, there is another that
totally sucks.

Generally, support for software sucks or is non-existent, so software
manufacturers should just drop the pretense about support from their
licensing. And don't make rules that vicimizes people and businesses in
the OPs situation.

People and shops like yours would continue to support what they sell to
their customers.

--
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]

Your analogies are completely ridiculous and make no sense in the context
what's at issue here.

On the contrary, the analogies are very apt.

Yes, MS has their silly fine print that makes you SOL
if you have OEM software and the computer gets stolen.

Jusrt like every other software maunfacturer who allows OEMs to market
their products.

But myself and many
others don't agree with it.

Then simply buy a PC without OEM software.

If you buy a computer with OEM software

.... you've agreed to the limits of the OEM license.

(installed or not) you are still paying for the software and the license to
use it.

Not quite accurate. What you've paid for is a license to use the
software *only* on that one specific computer. That's why OEM licenses
cost significantly less than retail licenses.

How is that different than going to the store and buying a boxed
copy of the same software?

Because a retail license has different terms, and costs a lot more.


--

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

 

[Donald L McDaniel]

You're taking me too literally. I'm not talking about if the OS is
different or not. Regardless if it's the boxed version or an OEM
version you are still paying for a piece of software. And if you
buy a new computer (because your old one was stolen) you should be
allowed to install it.

Ask yourself this question:
"If a scuzzball steals YOUR car, who owns the hundred dollars the thief
found in the glovebox?"

Also ask your question:
"If a scuzzball burglarizes YOUR house, does he own the million dollars he
found inside the house?"

Anyone with a lick of sense would answer both questions with:
"The one the scuzzball stole it from, of course."

MAN!!! What in God's name are they teaching our children in school nowadays
that someone would even ask such a foolish question?

 

[Steve N.]

Only in some demented MS created virtual reality! In fact, the copies
of software are still in the possession of its rightful owners, and the
only thing stopping this business from using the software is MS's
Nightmare on EULA Street!
LOL!



And If the Insurance company asks if they still are in position of the
software, how do you suggest the OP answer?

Well, if it is OEM software they should explain that by the EULA they
are not supposed to "re-use" the software on other machines and all the
attendant activation issues in attempting to do so, and it was actually
included with the purchase price of the machines that were stolen. If it
is "Retail" then the answer would be a simple "Yes".

What if the theft is less than the deductible?

It ain't as simple as you suggest, Juppy.

That's not a Windows XP issue. That's a seperate contract between the
insured and insurer.

So because of MS's BS EULA, though the copy of software is not stolen
this business is victimized a second time, and can't use the software it
still has.

There's an awfull lot of assuming going one here. No one knows if the
OPs software was OEM, Retail, pirated, or stolen from a dead hobo face
down in a mud puddle under a bridge with a glue bag over his head.

Steve

 

[kurttrail]

On the contrary, the analogies are very apt.

Bruce you are full of sh*t, and so are the analogies. Notice you don't
show why you believe the are "apt."

"If you buy a car with Firestone tires, and someone steals your car, you
don't get a new set of wheels."

Now if the thief left the wheels and only stole the car, would the OP
still be able to use the wheels? Of course.

The thief left the CD copies of software and the Product Keys, but you
think that the thief has rights to that software?

This analogy of a stolen car and its tires, is total BS in the OPs
situation. The thief didn't steal the physical copies of software, nor
the keys.

Jusrt like every other software maunfacturer who allows OEMs to market
their products.

Yep. Doesn't make it right or moral. In effect, MS's BS rules are
victimizes the OP again!

Then simply buy a PC without OEM software.


.... you've agreed to the limits of the OEM license.

After the purchase was already consumated. I agree though that I'll
never buy an OEM computer.

Not quite accurate. What you've paid for is a license to use the
software *only* on that one specific computer. That's why OEM
licenses cost significantly less than retail licenses.

Yep, them are MS's BS rules. And if this was an individual that was a
victim of theft, I'd tell them to ignore them, as MS is full of sh*t
when it comes to private non-commercial use rules, as they do not
possess the exclusive right to such a use. But since this is most
likely a business that has been victimized, they must live with being
victimized by MS's BS rules, as they were victimized by the actual
thief!

Because a retail license has different terms, and costs a lot more.

A lot more money, for not much more.

--
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"

 

[Shooter]

At least soon, the Bangalore Dell center will answer with American
names and speak "Texan". Forget enhancing their Technical skills,
just teach them Slang/inflection and hand out Stetsons to replace
the their traditional headwear.

Last time I had to deal with outsourced, dumbed down, tech support,
they (Dell) hadn't even taken the time to teach them English. Got
nowhere with them as I could not understand them and they couldn't
understand me. Never bought another conglomerate computer again...
been buying local builds ever since and not a regret. My tech support
is handled by a nice gentleman that I can see eye to eye and guess
what... he's the one that built the computer.

Wonder why Dell, Gateway, MS, Symantec and all the other conglomerates
that have abandoned the American worker and gone the outsource route
have not gone on and moved their corporate orifices to third world
countries? I mean, just like the outsourced tech labor, the costs
would be a big savings. They could get a nice bungalow for pennies on
the dollar for their corporate orifice and use child prison labor to
handle the sales phones while running ads in American Magazines
showing well dressed American Men and Women in nice plush offices
overlooking a fake cityscape of an American City dealing with the
public while smiling and showing their bright white bleached teeth.

Regards,

 

[kurttrail]

Ask yourself this question:
"If a scuzzball steals YOUR car, who owns the hundred dollars the
thief found in the glovebox?"

But the thief didn't get the install CDs and PKs, so they didn't get the
hundred dollars!

Also ask your question:
"If a scuzzball burglarizes YOUR house, does he own the million
dollars he found inside the house?"

Anyone with a lick of sense would answer both questions with:
"The one the scuzzball stole it from, of course."

MAN!!! What in God's name are they teaching our children in school
nowadays that someone would even ask such a foolish question?

So you sympathize with the victimizers, the thieves, both of them, but
not the victim of the crime! What in "God's name" have you been taught,
and are you teaching that kind of heartlessness to your children?!

Matthew 5:7 Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.

--
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"

 

[Shooter]

But all this Anti-Piracy crap is unnecessary, since it
really doesn't reduce piracy

That is what I have been reading in most all the computing mags and
even on a tech discussion on TV. They are saying that people that
hack XP have ways around the activation gimmick, that they are not
phased one bit by the activation gimmick. In other words, the only
people that have to deal with the activation gimmick are the honest
ones that actually paid for the software.

Regards,

 

[kurttrail]

Well, if it is OEM software they should explain that by the EULA they
are not supposed to "re-use" the software on other machines and all
the attendant activation issues in attempting to do so, and it was
actually included with the purchase price of the machines that were
stolen. If it is "Retail" then the answer would be a simple "Yes".

And insurance companies just love accepting explanations!

That's not a Windows XP issue. That's a seperate contract between the
insured and insurer.

I know, but Juppy brought it up and implied that it would be simple to
add it to an insurance claim. Nothing is simple when it comes to
insurance claims for theft.

There's an awfull lot of assuming going one here. No one knows if the
OPs software was OEM, Retail, pirated, or stolen from a dead hobo face
down in a mud puddle under a bridge with a glue bag over his head.

LOL! What's new! I'm just responding to the nonsense that if OEM, the
OPs business/employer? is victimized yet again by MS BS OEM licensing!
MS doesn't even support OEM software, so where do they get the balls to
have any say on its use?

--
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"

 

[Alias]

That is what I have been reading in most all the computing mags and
even on a tech discussion on TV. They are saying that people that
hack XP have ways around the activation gimmick, that they are not
phased one bit by the activation gimmick.

Not for one nano second. Hacked XPs don't even ask to be activated.

In other words, the only
people that have to deal with the activation gimmick are the honest
ones that actually paid for the software.

Regards,

MS claims that piracy is hurting profits. Horsepucky:

http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2005/mft05042930.htm

What their activation and Window Verification scams do is increase MS'
profits by making paying customers buy more unnecessary copies of XP, not
stop pirates. This is probably the biggest PR fiasco MS has come up with
since its inception.

Alias

 

[GO]

As I've already stated, I understand what MS's stance is on the matter but I
just don't agree with it, and that is my opinion. I think a more accurate
way to use his analogy would be to say that if someone stole your car but
left the Firestone tires, you are not entitled to another set of tires.

 

[Steve N.]

And insurance companies just love accepting explanations!

It doesn't matter what insurance companies love or not. If you don't ask
then the answer is automatically "No." Dealing with insurance claims is
rarely easy but if you don't take it upon yourself to question and
present pertinent information regarding the claim, who's fault is that?

I know, but Juppy brought it up and implied that it would be simple to
add it to an insurance claim. Nothing is simple when it comes to
insurance claims for theft.

Yeah, I know. Just trying to get the ball back in court.

LOL! What's new! I'm just responding to the nonsense that if OEM, the
OPs business/employer? is victimized yet again by MS BS OEM licensing!
MS doesn't even support OEM software, so where do they get the balls to
have any say on its use?

The only time I know of where MS attempted to sue someone over an
alleged OEM software EULA violation they settled out of court with
undisclosed conditions after a smidgen of bad press over it. So I guess
they don't have to exactly walk around with a wheelbarrow to hold them
balls, now do they?

Steve

 

[GO]

I guess I should have refreshed my list before posting. You've made the
same point as me. Thanks for the support

 

[kurttrail]

Steve N. wrote:

The only time I know of where MS attempted to sue someone over an
alleged OEM software EULA violation they settled out of court with
undisclosed conditions after a smidgen of bad press over it. So I
guess they don't have to exactly walk around with a wheelbarrow to
hold them balls, now do they?

Especially when it comes to small businesses! (And what company isn't a
small business in comparison to MS).

MS send the BSA to extort them to follow MS's rules, no matter how
convoluted they are, or get put out of business with legal fees.

MS and it's thugs are used to victimizing small businesses over trivial
and arcane licensing rules.

--
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"

 

[GO]

Ask yourself this question:
"If a scuzzball steals YOUR car, who owns the hundred dollars the thief
found in the glovebox?"

Also ask your question:
"If a scuzzball burglarizes YOUR house, does he own the million dollars he
found inside the house?"

Anyone with a lick of sense would answer both questions with:
"The one the scuzzball stole it from, of course."

MAN!!! What in God's name are they teaching our children in school nowadays
that someone would even ask such a foolish question?

--
Donald L McDaniel
Please reply to the original thread,
so that the thread may be kept intact.
==============================

What's with these people and the screwball analogies?! In all of your
examples....if someone broke into my house and stole my stuff it is STILL my
stuff which does not become the property of the scuzzball. He may get to
enjoy it but at no point does it become his stuff. If the scuzzball get's
caught the stuff would get returned to me.

 

[Bruce Chambers]

What's with these people and the screwball analogies?! In all of your
examples....if someone broke into my house and stole my stuff it is STILL my
stuff which does not become the property of the scuzzball.

No one has claimed that stolen property becomes the property of the
thief. But the simple fact is that the thief has physical possession of
said property, and the victim doesn't. So, obviously, the victim cannot
use an item that is not in his possession.

The situation admittedly becomes murkier when dealing with software,
but the facts remain. Remember, the installation CD does *not*
represent the software license, the Product Key and CoA do. And, in the
case of an OEM installation, these *were* stolen along with the computer.



--

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