Can I use the Host Vista Ultimate license for a Virtual Vista Mach

[Guest]

I have a legit copy of Vista Ultimate and I wish to create a test Vista
Ultimate environment/machine/instance using Virtual PC 2007 on the same
machine that I have Vista Installed. Can I reuse the host license key for the
Virtual machine or will it invalidate the host license ? There seems to be
many conflicting reports on the web and I wish to remain legal.

Many thanks.

 

[Dustin Harper]

You could always just not use the key and run it unactivated in the virtual
machine, test it that way for up to a year (there is a way to do it
legally).

But, it is still one license per install, this includes virtual machines.

 

[Rick Rogers]

Hi,

A virtual instance requires its own license. If you set it up and don't
activate it (best to just install without the product key), you'll be able
to use it as a test environment for 30 days.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

 

[BobS]

Rick,

The Vista Ultimate EULA states in part under Additional License Terms, paragraph 6 ...:

"USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system on the licensed device. If you do so, you may not play or access content or use applications protected by any Microsoft digital, information or enterprise rights management technology or other Microsoft rights management services or use BitLocker. We advise against playing or accessing content or using applications protected by other digital, information or enterprise rights management technology or other rights management services or using full volume disk drive encryption."

Please not it states " software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system on the licensed device" It does not require it's own license.

Not to hassle any MVP's - certainly not my intention but I would expect the MVP's here to have a better understanding of the EULA's than what I've been reading lately. And when they're corrected, the MVP's don't even acknowledge they were in error - or point out with facts that someone else was in error.

Bob S.

 

[Rick Rogers]

Hi Bob,

You're misinterpreting that phrase. Actually, much earlier in the license is
this "You may install one copy of the software on the licensed device" under
installation rights. Regardless if emulated or real, you can only use the
license for one installation.

Looking at the paste you posted, it states that you can use your license in
a virtual environment (some versions, like Basic and Home Premium, cannot be
used in this fashion). The purpose of that section of the license is to
acknowledge that the license can be used in that environment. Nowhere does
it state that you can use your license to install to both the host and the
virtual environment simultaneously.

I don't mind admitting when I'm wrong, and if you check around you'll see
that I do. In this case, having spoken directly with the licensing team
manager just over a week ago, I'm quite confident that I am accurate here.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

Rick,

The Vista Ultimate EULA states in part under Additional License Terms,
paragraph 6 ...:

"USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may use the software installed on
the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system
on the licensed device. If you do so, you may not play or access content or
use applications protected by any Microsoft digital, information or
enterprise rights management technology or other Microsoft rights management
services or use BitLocker. We advise against playing or accessing content or
using applications protected by other digital, information or enterprise
rights management technology or other rights management services or using
full volume disk drive encryption."

Please not it states " software installed on the licensed device within a
virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system on the licensed device" It
does not require it's own license.

Not to hassle any MVP's - certainly not my intention but I would expect the
MVP's here to have a better understanding of the EULA's than what I've been
reading lately. And when they're corrected, the MVP's don't even
acknowledge they were in error - or point out with facts that someone else
was in error.

Bob S.

 

[BobS]

Rick,

I do not believe I am misinterpreting and the exact language used states the same software (OS) can be used with virtual technologies. Please read below.

The EULA states:

"Before you use the software under a license, you must assign that license to one device (physical hardware system). That device is the "licensed device.â€

So we have a one physical PC with one license assigned to it....
It further states terms which expand the users license rights:

"Edition Specific Rights. See the Additional License Terms sections at the end of this agreement for license terms that apply to specific editions of the software."

Additional licensing terms are assigned to Vista Ultimate beyond the main license terms - with one being:

USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system on the licensed device. If you do so, you may not play or access content or use applications protected by any Microsoft digital, information or enterprise rights management technology or other Microsoft rights management services or use BitLocker. We advise against playing or accessing content or using applications protected by other digital, information or enterprise rights management technology or other rights management services or using full volume disk drive encryption

Please note that the above paragraph states "You may use the software installed {Vista is software} on the licensed device within...."

It explicitly allows the same software to be used within a virtual environment on that physical device and does not state or even imply a second license is required.

Why else would they state it this way? If they wanted to insure that use of Vista in a virtual environment required another license, they could have stated "Use of Vista in a virtual environment requires a separate license." Or words to that effect - they do not.

So if I'm wrong, then please have the license guru's tell us which words explicitly require the virtual Vista OS installation to have a separate license.

Their words (not mine) allow this use without another license required.



Bob S.

 

[Rick Rogers]

Hi Bob,

I am thinking this line is what is confusing: " You may use the software
installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated)
hardware system on the licensed device". It seems to imply that you have the
right to install it to a virtual machine that exists on the system that is
running Vista, but that is not correct.

That line does not mean you can install it in a virtual environment in
addition to the physical one. It means you can install it to a virtual
environment that exists in the system that contains the licensed device.
"Licensed device" does not mean the installation, but rather the hardware.
The license for Ultimate allow for only one installation to a licensed
device. That install can be to the system containing the device, or to a
virtual environment that exists on the system containing that device, not to
both.

I'm not sure I can explain it any better.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

Rick,

I do not believe I am misinterpreting and the exact language used states the
same software (OS) can be used with virtual technologies. Please read below.

The EULA states:

"Before you use the software under a license, you must assign that license
to one device (physical hardware system). That device is the "licensed
device.â€

So we have a one physical PC with one license assigned to it....
It further states terms which expand the users license rights:

"Edition Specific Rights. See the Additional License Terms sections at the
end of this agreement for license terms that apply to specific editions of
the software."

Additional licensing terms are assigned to Vista Ultimate beyond the main
license terms - with one being:

USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may use the software installed on
the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system
on the licensed device. If you do so, you may not play or access content or
use applications protected by any Microsoft digital, information or
enterprise rights management technology or other Microsoft rights management
services or use BitLocker. We advise against playing or accessing content or
using applications protected by other digital, information or enterprise
rights management technology or other rights management services or using
full volume disk drive encryption

Please note that the above paragraph states "You may use the software
installed {Vista is software} on the licensed device within...."

It explicitly allows the same software to be used within a virtual
environment on that physical device and does not state or even imply a
second license is required.

Why else would they state it this way? If they wanted to insure that use of
Vista in a virtual environment required another license, they could have
stated "Use of Vista in a virtual environment requires a separate license."
Or words to that effect - they do not.

So if I'm wrong, then please have the license guru's tell us which words
explicitly require the virtual Vista OS installation to have a separate
license.

Their words (not mine) allow this use without another license required.



Bob S.

 

[BobS]

Rick,

Exactly the words and they are not confusing at Ed Bott points out when you
compare the licensing for WinXP and how it was changed for Vista (version
specific).

Thanks for your responses but I think that anyone wishing to use the
versions allowed by the EULA in a virtual environment will not be in
violation. Read what Ed Bott and others reported on this exact issue.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=157

Bob S.

 

[Rick Rogers]

Hi Bob,

I'm sorry, but Ed's wrong. He is doing the same thing and misinterpreting
that line as permission to create two installations. It isn't, it merely
means that you can install your retail license in a virtual machine. It
doesn't mean in addition to the physical one. It means either/or.

As to Home Basic and Home Premium, they can be run in a virtual environment
with an MSDN license, but not a retail. This was done to allow software
developers a means of testing their applications on these versions within a
virtual environment.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

 

[BobS]

Rick,

But it doesn't say either/or, it states explicitly - "You may use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system on the licensed device." No misinterpretation, no opinion - this sentence say's it exactly. It's a stand-alone statement and only makes a reference to earlier wording which defines a licensed device.

I understand your meaning but there are no words in the EULA to enforce that interpretation. It is giving permission by stating "You may use the software installed..."

Look at the rest of the wording.

"If you do so, you may not play or access content or use applications protected by any Microsoft digital, information or enterprise rights management technology or other Microsoft rights management services or use BitLocker. We advise against playing or accessing content or using applications protected by other digital, information or enterprise rights management technology or other rights management services or using full volume disk drive encryption."

If the VM copy of Vista did have it's own license - then why could you not use DRM?

So if I can use program "A", "B" and "C" that is installed on the licensed device, than I can also use the same Vista license in the VM also. It is not excluded anywhere in the EULA and no wording states we need a separate license as you do for WinXP. That is exactly was what Ed Bott was pointing out - the wording has changed - to allow this. Otherwise - they would have left the wording the same.

Maybe you can contact the licensing guru's again and ask them to furnish the reference where it's stated we cannot use the same OS license on the host and VM - I certainly can't find it. It is confusing and if what "MS meant to say" is not explicity stated in a contract, then it's not enforceable. I and others are not twisting words - I'm reading the words exactly and not inferring anything such as "they meant to say" or "this must mean".

But then again, more Scotch may clear this whole thing up.....

Bob S.

 

[Rick Rogers]

Hi Bob,

I have an email out to get some clarification on this, will let you know.

By the by, I prefer a good ale to scotch, but will happily imbibe on both.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

Rick,

But it doesn't say either/or, it states explicitly - "You may use the
software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise
emulated) hardware system on the licensed device." No misinterpretation, no
opinion - this sentence say's it exactly. It's a stand-alone statement and
only makes a reference to earlier wording which defines a licensed device.

I understand your meaning but there are no words in the EULA to enforce that
interpretation. It is giving permission by stating "You may use the
software installed..."

Look at the rest of the wording.

"If you do so, you may not play or access content or use applications
protected by any Microsoft digital, information or enterprise rights
management technology or other Microsoft rights management services or use
BitLocker. We advise against playing or accessing content or using
applications protected by other digital, information or enterprise rights
management technology or other rights management services or using full
volume disk drive encryption."

If the VM copy of Vista did have it's own license - then why could you not
use DRM?

So if I can use program "A", "B" and "C" that is installed on the licensed
device, than I can also use the same Vista license in the VM also. It is not
excluded anywhere in the EULA and no wording states we need a separate
license as you do for WinXP. That is exactly was what Ed Bott was pointing
out - the wording has changed - to allow this. Otherwise - they would have
left the wording the same.

Maybe you can contact the licensing guru's again and ask them to furnish the
reference where it's stated we cannot use the same OS license on the host
and VM - I certainly can't find it. It is confusing and if what "MS meant
to say" is not explicity stated in a contract, then it's not enforceable. I
and others are not twisting words - I'm reading the words exactly and not
inferring anything such as "they meant to say" or "this must mean".

But then again, more Scotch may clear this whole thing up.....

Bob S.

 

[BobS]

Rick,

Great ! When you get it - good, bad or indifferent, would you start a new
thread with it - "Vista VM" or something like that? I think we're probably
the only two watching this thread and VM is an important issue.

I owe you an ale....or two...or three....

Thanks for going the extra mile,

Bob S.

 

[Guest]

I believe you are quite incorrect in your interpretation...

""USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may use the software installed on
the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system
on the licensed device. "

Cleary indicates/infers that the software can be installed on a licensed
device (My vista host) and within a virtual environment on the same host.
That clearly implies two installations. One hardware.

Perhaps your contact within the licensing team can step forward and clarify.

 

[Guest]

Just found this on the MS site

6. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may use the software installed
on the
licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system on
the licensed device. If
you do so, you may not play or access content or use applications protected
by any Microsoft digital,
information or enterprise rights management technology or other Microsoft
rights management
services or use BitLocker. We advise against playing or accessing content or
using applications
protected by other digital, information or enterprise rights management
technology or other rights
management services or using full volume disk drive encryption.


http://download.microsoft.com/docum...lish_36d0fe99-75e4-4875-8153-889cf5105718.pdf

So I can, but there are no published ways of activating the Virtual copy
without treading over the Host license in terms of hardware changes and
re-activation.

 

[Rick Rogers]

Read the rest of the discussion with BobS. That section does not mean you
can install it *in addition* to the host license. It means that with this
version of Vista you can install it to the licensed device or to a virtual
machine that is on the licensed device. The key word here being "or". This
section of the license is here because only certain versions can be
installed to a virtual environment, not because they are licensed to install
to both the host and the virtual machine.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

 

[BobS]

Rich,

Which - or - are you referring to? I see none used in the context that you
state. Please post the sentence.

Bob S.

 

[Guest]

We can argue the toss about the semantics here... From your previous posts it
appears that you have access to someone that can give an authorative answer.

Do you think you can some up with a definite yes or no from an insider ?
Perhaps invite that person to contribute to this thread. Obviously this
issue is quite big and I would hate to breach any licensing agreement based
on two differing interpretations from a clause that is equally ambiguous. You
may not agree with the ambiguity here, to be frank I don['t agree with your
interpretation so the issue really needs to be clarified legally from within
Microsoft.

Thanks for your continued involvement here.

Regards

Adrian

 

[Rick Rogers]

Hi,

I have not let the issue drop, but the person I need to clarify this with is
currently away.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

We can argue the toss about the semantics here... From your previous posts
it
appears that you have access to someone that can give an authorative
answer.

Do you think you can some up with a definite yes or no from an insider ?
Perhaps invite that person to contribute to this thread. Obviously this
issue is quite big and I would hate to breach any licensing agreement
based
on two differing interpretations from a clause that is equally ambiguous.
You
may not agree with the ambiguity here, to be frank I don['t agree with
your
interpretation so the issue really needs to be clarified legally from
within
Microsoft.

Thanks for your continued involvement here.

Regards

Adrian

Read the rest of the discussion with BobS. That section does not mean you
can install it *in addition* to the host license. It means that with this
version of Vista you can install it to the licensed device or to a
virtual
machine that is on the licensed device. The key word here being "or".
This
section of the license is here because only certain versions can be
installed to a virtual environment, not because they are licensed to
install
to both the host and the virtual machine.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org