Licensing

[Mattty]

We have two computers and I want to run windows XP pro on
both and also microsoft office 2003 pro on both. Do I
need to purchase two seperate copies of both or does the
existing licence allow me to do this.

Thanks for any help

Matt

 

[Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\)]

You need two separate copies of both. One license, one machine, they won't
activate on more than one machine and if they aren't activated, the will
cease to function after 30 days.

 

[kurttrail]

We have two computers and I want to run windows XP pro on
both and also microsoft office 2003 pro on both. Do I
need to purchase two seperate copies of both or does the
existing licence allow me to do this.

Thanks for any help

Matt

http://microscum.com/mmpafaq/

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[Michael Stevens]

We have two computers and I want to run windows XP pro on
both and also microsoft office 2003 pro on both. Do I
need to purchase two seperate copies of both or does the
existing licence allow me to do this.

Thanks for any help

Matt

The existing license [EULA] does not allow multiple installs. Setup requires
you to agree to the EULA to continue setup of XP, so consider yourself
informed as to the licensing restrictions. [It is also printed on the
outside of the retail box that XP is limited to one computer per license and
has electronic safeguards to enforce the requirement] To install on multiple
computers, you must make a conscious decision to lie that you agree to the
EULA or setup will not continue. The argument that the EULA has never been
enforced does not change the fact you had to agree when you didn't to
continue setup on more than one computer using the same CD key.
The information Kurt gives is similar to or the equivalent of a person
supplying information on how to grow pot, make a bomb, manufacture speed,
cheat on you SAT test, distill moonshine, and a myriad of other questionable
activities that to anyone following the advice, have varying moral and
judicial consequence, but to supply the information; it is not illegal but
could be liable.
--

Michael Stevens MS-MVP XP
(e-mail address removed)
http://michaelstevenstech.com
For a better newsgroup experience. Setup a newsreader.
http://michaelstevenstech.com/outlookexpressnewreader.htm

 

[kurttrail]

We have two computers and I want to run windows XP pro on
both and also microsoft office 2003 pro on both. Do I
need to purchase two seperate copies of both or does the
existing licence allow me to do this.

Thanks for any help

Matt

The existing license [EULA] does not allow multiple installs. Setup
requires you to agree to the EULA to continue setup of XP, so
consider yourself informed as to the licensing restrictions. [It is
also printed on the outside of the retail box that XP is limited to
one computer per license and has electronic safeguards to enforce the
requirement] To install on multiple computers, you must make a
conscious decision to lie that you agree to the EULA or setup will
not continue. The argument that the EULA has never been enforced does
not change the fact you had to agree when you didn't to continue
setup on more than one computer using the same CD key.
The information Kurt gives is similar to or the equivalent of a person
supplying information on how to grow pot, make a bomb, manufacture
speed, cheat on you SAT test, distill moonshine, and a myriad of
other questionable activities that to anyone following the advice,
have varying moral and judicial consequence, but to supply the
information; it is not illegal but could be liable.

ROFL! Actually the only thing that is questionable is your analogy,
Mikey. Growing and possessing pot, making a bomb, manufacturing speed,
and distilling moonshine aren't questionable activities under the law,
they are actual criminal offences. Breaking a contract that one party
has every right to remain anonymous to the other party logically can't
not even be legally enforced in a civil court. You cannot sue someone
for breaking a EULA who you can't even prove actually even bought the
product, let alone agreed to abide by some bogus usage terms in a
post-purchase shrinkwrap.

What's really questionable is any buying into MS's EULA claims to begin
with! How can anyone legally enforce so-called "license" terms on
anyone who has every right to remain totally anonymous?

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

"By the act of opening up this post on your computer, you agree that I
am your everlasting Lord & Saviour. Breach of this term will result in
you burning in hell for ever and ever! Amen!"

 

[Alex Nichol]

We have two computers and I want to run windows XP pro on
both and also microsoft office 2003 pro on both. Do I
need to purchase two seperate copies of both or does the
existing licence allow me to do this.

Windows requires a separate copy for each machine (you can get an
additional license - see
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/addlic.asp
but the discount is probably a smaller saving than buying a second
regular copy at a discount store)
A retail copy of Office (other than 'Small Business) may be installed on
a desktop machine and also on the owner's personal laptop. I don't know
if that fits your position

 

[Bruce Chambers]

Greetings --

Two computers require two OS licenses. This is nothing new.

As it has *always* been with *all* Microsoft operating systems,
it's
necessary (to be in compliance with both the EULA and copyright laws,
if not technically) to purchase one WinXP license for each computer on
which it is installed. The only way in which WinXP licensing differs
from that of earlier versions of Windows is that Microsoft has finally
added a copy protection and anti-theft mechanism, Product Activation,
to prevent (or at least make more difficult) multiple installations
using a single license.

In the past, the Microsoft Office retail license did permit the
product to be installed upon one desktop PC and one portable computer
simultaneously, provided that the individual who purchased the license
was the primary user of both machines. The License did not permit the
product to be simultaneously installed upon two desktop PCs (or two
laptops, for that matter) that were regularly used by different
people. However, I haven't received my copy of Office 2003 yet, so
you'll have to read its EULA to be sure.


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]

"By the act of opening up this post on your computer, you agree that I
am your everlasting Lord & Saviour. Breach of this term will result in
you burning in hell for ever and ever! Amen!"

Greetings --

Two computers require two OS licenses. This is nothing new.

As it has *always* been with *all* Microsoft operating systems,
it's
necessary (to be in compliance with both the EULA and copyright laws,
if not technically) to purchase one WinXP license for each computer on
which it is installed. The only way in which WinXP licensing differs
from that of earlier versions of Windows is that Microsoft has finally
added a copy protection and anti-theft mechanism, Product Activation,
to prevent (or at least make more difficult) multiple installations
using a single license.

In the past, the Microsoft Office retail license did permit the
product to be installed upon one desktop PC and one portable computer
simultaneously, provided that the individual who purchased the license
was the primary user of both machines. The License did not permit the
product to be simultaneously installed upon two desktop PCs (or two
laptops, for that matter) that were regularly used by different
people. However, I haven't received my copy of Office 2003 yet, so
you'll have to read its EULA to be sure.

Just ask the moron what specific copyright law he's talking about. He
either won't answer, or will avoid stating any copyright law.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[Gary Tait]

We have two computers and I want to run windows XP pro on
both and also microsoft office 2003 pro on both. Do I
need to purchase two seperate copies of both or does the
existing licence allow me to do this.

Thanks for any help

Matt

You don't need to buy two separate media, just an additional license
to use with the media you have (one license included with it).

 

[Anon]

Ernie Ball, Brazil, and China Have the right idea!

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20031116/D7URSKHO0.html

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/7285339.htm

http://news.com.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html?tag=lh

Music to my ears!

--
Anon

"Windows [n.]
A thirty-two bit extension and GUI shell to a sixteen bit
patch to an eight bit operating system originally coded
for a four bit microprocessor and sold by a two-bit
company that can't stand one bit of competition."
(Anonymous USEnet post)

-----Original Message-----

"By the act of opening up this post on your computer, you
agree that I
am your everlasting Lord & Saviour. Breach of this term
will result in
you burning in hell for ever and ever! Amen!"

Bruce Chambers wrote:

: Greetings --
:
: Two computers require two OS licenses. This is
nothing new.
:
: As it has always been with all Microsoft operating
systems,
: it's
: necessary (to be in compliance with both the EULA and
copyright laws,
: if not technically) to purchase one WinXP license for
each computer on
: which it is installed. The only way in which WinXP
licensing differs
: from that of earlier versions of Windows is that
Microsoft has finally
: added a copy protection and anti-theft mechanism,
Product Activation,
: to prevent (or at least make more difficult) multiple
installations
: using a single license.
:
: In the past, the Microsoft Office retail license did
permit the
: product to be installed upon one desktop PC and one
portable computer
: simultaneously, provided that the individual who
purchased the license
: was the primary user of both machines. The License did
not permit the
: product to be simultaneously installed upon two desktop
PCs (or two
: laptops, for that matter) that were regularly used by
different
: people. However, I haven't received my copy of Office
2003 yet, so
: you'll have to read its EULA to be sure.

Just ask the moron what specific copyright law he's
talking about. He
either won't answer, or will avoid stating any copyright
law.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an
Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[Michael Stevens]

We have two computers and I want to run windows XP pro on
both and also microsoft office 2003 pro on both. Do I
need to purchase two seperate copies of both or does the
existing licence allow me to do this.

Thanks for any help

Matt

The existing license [EULA] does not allow multiple installs. Setup
requires you to agree to the EULA to continue setup of XP, so
consider yourself informed as to the licensing restrictions. [It is
also printed on the outside of the retail box that XP is limited to
one computer per license and has electronic safeguards to enforce the
requirement] To install on multiple computers, you must make a
conscious decision to lie that you agree to the EULA or setup will
not continue. The argument that the EULA has never been enforced does
not change the fact you had to agree when you didn't to continue
setup on more than one computer using the same CD key.
The information Kurt gives is similar to or the equivalent of a
person supplying information on how to grow pot, make a bomb,
manufacture speed, cheat on you SAT test, distill moonshine, and a
myriad of other questionable activities that to anyone following the
advice, have varying moral and judicial consequence, but to supply
the information; it is not illegal but could be liable.

ROFL! Actually the only thing that is questionable is your analogy,
Mikey. Growing and possessing pot, making a bomb, manufacturing
speed, and distilling moonshine aren't questionable activities under
the law, they are actual criminal offences. Breaking a contract that
one party has every right to remain anonymous to the other party
logically can't not even be legally enforced in a civil court. You
cannot sue someone for breaking a EULA who you can't even prove
actually even bought the product, let alone agreed to abide by some
bogus usage terms in a post-purchase shrinkwrap.

What's really questionable is any buying into MS's EULA claims to
begin with! How can anyone legally enforce so-called "license" terms
on anyone who has every right to remain totally anonymous?

Also questionable is your OPINION[not proven] the EULA cannot be upheld. All
of my examples are legal when they are performed within the legal
constraints and locations of there execution. Providing information on how
to replicate the procedure is similar or the same as the information you
provide. Breaking Microsoft's contract has not been decided by a judicial
ruling and your OPINION is only your OPINION. Sorry to lump you into such a
sorry group of society, but that is where you where you belong.
--

Michael Stevens MS-MVP XP
(e-mail address removed)
http://michaelstevenstech.com
For a better newsgroup experience. Setup a newsreader.
http://michaelstevenstech.com/outlookexpressnewreader.htm

 

[kurttrail]

"By the act of opening up this post on your computer, you agree that I
am your everlasting Lord & Saviour. Breach of this term will result in
you burning in hell for ever and ever! Amen!"

Also questionable is your OPINION[not proven] the EULA cannot be
upheld. All of my examples are legal when they are performed within
the legal constraints and locations of there execution. Providing
information on how to replicate the procedure is similar or the same
as the information you provide. Breaking Microsoft's contract has not
been decided by a judicial ruling and your OPINION is only your
OPINION. Sorry to lump you into such a sorry group of society, but
that is where you where you belong.

It's a matter of logic, Mikey. MS can't legally enforce their so-called
"license," if they don't have any right to know who has even purchased a
copy of MS software. Can't sue someone who is legally totally
anonymous.

This is just plain simple logic.

When some court rules, or Congress passes a law that allows a
corporation the right to know how individuals use the retail products in
the privacy & sanctity of their homes, let me know, but until then,
there is absolutely no legal precedent that gives any corporation that
right. You can accept the rules imposed on you, but there is no legal
precedent that requires you to, only the wishful thinking of a bunch
greedy corporations with their EULA FUD.

Bend over for the FUD of the members of the BSA, but that is your own
personal choice, as no court precedent or law requires you to follow
this usage-nonsense in the privacy of your own home. My opinion takes
into account the law as it exists today. Your opinion is what the
members of the BSA hope the law will be someday over the rainbow.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[Danny Mingledorff]

Maybe there is something to this global warming stuff, it's suddenly getting
hot here....

"By the act of opening up this post on your computer, you agree that I
am your everlasting Lord & Saviour. Breach of this term will result in
you burning in hell for ever and ever! Amen!"

<snip>

 

[fff]

-----Original Message-----
We have two computers and I want to run windows XP pro on
both and also microsoft office 2003 pro on both. Do I
need to purchase two seperate copies of both or does the
existing licence allow me to do this.

Thanks for any help

Matt
.

 

[David]

"By the act of opening up this post on your computer, you agree that I
am your everlasting Lord & Saviour. Breach of this term will result in
you burning in hell for ever and ever! Amen!"



Just ask the moron what specific copyright law he's talking about. He
either won't answer, or will avoid stating any copyright law.

Wrong, We aren't given the chance to agree or disagree. With the EULA,
you are. You agree and you can install Windows. You disagress and the
program kicks you out.

--

David

Programmers write "Help Files" for a reason. use them.

"Due to Viewer dicretion...
Graphic violence is advised"

http://www.HeroicStories.com/
http://www.thisistrue.com/

 

[kurttrail]

"By the act of opening up this post on your computer, you agree that I
am your everlasting Lord & Saviour. Breach of this term will result in
you burning in hell for ever and ever! Amen!"

Wrong, We aren't given the chance to agree or disagree. With the
EULA, you are. You agree and you can install Windows. You disagress
and the program kicks you out.

So what copyright law covers your nonsense?

And I always figured you'd burn!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[Michael Stevens]

"By the act of opening up this post on your computer, you agree that I
am your everlasting Lord & Saviour. Breach of this term will result
in you burning in hell for ever and ever! Amen!"

Your mentality shows with the above, you are trying to make a statement, but
you only offend.
By opening your reply, only someone with physic skills or previous knolodge
could know doing so would condem the respondent to burning in hell, you do
not give a choice to agree or disagree before you declare one should burn in
hell. Even [the evil in your opinion] Microsoft gives you a choice to agree
or disagree.

--

Michael Stevens MS-MVP XP
(e-mail address removed)
http://michaelstevenstech.com
For a better newsgroup experience. Setup a newsreader.
http://michaelstevenstech.com/outlookexpressnewreader.htm

 

[kurttrail]

"By the act of scrolling this post on your computer, you agree that I am
your everlasting Lord & Saviour. Breach of this term will result in you
burning in hell for ever and ever! Amen!"

"By the act of opening up this post on your computer, you agree that
I
am your everlasting Lord & Saviour. Breach of this term will result
in you burning in hell for ever and ever! Amen!"

Your mentality shows with the above, you are trying to make a
statement, but you only offend.
By opening your reply, only someone with physic skills or previous
knolodge could know doing so would condem the respondent to burning
in hell, you do not give a choice to agree or disagree before you
declare one should burn in hell. Even [the evil in your opinion]
Microsoft gives you a choice to agree or disagree.

Ok, now you have a way of accepting this agreement or not. The choice
to scroll or not is yours!

So how will I be able to enforce my term on everybody that accepts by
scrolling to read this part of my reply, but don't reveal their identity
to me by replying to this post?

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[hermes]

While listening to the voices in their head blather on endlessly about
inspecific gibberish, Michael Stevens typed:
:: kurttrail wrote:
::: "By the act of opening up this post on your computer, you agree
::: that I am your everlasting Lord & Saviour. Breach of this term
::: will result in you burning in hell for ever and ever! Amen!"
:::
::
:: Your mentality shows with the above, you are trying to make a
:: statement, but you only offend.
:: By opening your reply, only someone with physic skills or previous
:: knolodge could know doing so would condem the respondent to burning
:: in hell, you do not give a choice to agree or disagree before you
:: declare one should burn in hell. Even [the evil in your opinion]
:: Microsoft gives you a choice to agree or disagree.
::
:: --
::
:: Michael Stevens MS-MVP XP
:: (e-mail address removed)
:: http://michaelstevenstech.com
:: For a better newsgroup experience. Setup a newsreader.
:: http://michaelstevenstech.com/outlookexpressnewreader.htm

M$'s shrink wrapped license does the same thing, doesn't it?

 

[David]

@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl:

:: Your mentality shows with the above, you are trying to make a
:: statement, but you only offend.
:: By opening your reply, only someone with physic skills or previous
:: knolodge could know doing so would condem the respondent to burning
:: in hell, you do not give a choice to agree or disagree before you
:: declare one should burn in hell. Even [the evil in your opinion]
:: Microsoft gives you a choice to agree or disagree.
::
:: --
M$'s shrink wrapped license does the same thing, doesn't it?

No, The EULA has a a way to agree or disagree with it, The "I Agree"
and " I don't Agree" buttons.


--

David

Programmers write "Help Files" for a reason. use them.

"Due to Viewer dicretion...
Graphic violence is advised"

http://www.HeroicStories.com/
http://www.thisistrue.com/