Jupiter said:
Clearly you have not read the EULA.
As for your source, you misunderstood or were misunderstood.
Or possibly had an incompetent tech.
Or can you give a verifiable source?
I did, but you continue to disregard my source as well as you can not
provide a source.
"one of the Activation people" is not a source.
Without a name and other relevant information, it is no better than hearsay.
And hearsay is all you are spreading.
I wasn't clear. I apologize. The "three times" was not in reference to
the EULA, at all, but with regard to the technical aspects of the
installation process during which the computer activates itself over
the Internet. Technically, as is how Windows actiavtes itself, has
nothing to do with the EULA. Obviously, I was not clear.
The EULA is more than "just a piece of paper".
For me, it is an agreement I freely accept or not.
I honour agreements I accept, apparently you prefer to remain ignorant of
agreements you accept.
Tell me, my noble friend, what do you do if the "agreement" turned out
to be improper, giving one party undo rights over the other, without
that other party's knowledge, forcing that party of accept hidden and
illegal terms?
Oh, but Microsoft would never do anything wrong. In all those court
battles MS was innocent. What was it that MS was found guilty of?
I find no sympathy with you. Some guy making a 2nd copy of XP, say for
his kid's old Win98 box, and I should feel a lack of "honor?"
*sigh*