Ok, I dutifully read the article by Paul Thurrott.
This man is LYING to the American Public.
In the first place, he begins speaking about the XP OEM License, and
then segues into the RETAIL license without saying he is speaking
about TWO different licenses, thus giving the impression that the
license terms of "one machine only" for an OEM license are the SAME
for the RETAIL license.
In addition NO WHERE in the XP OEM license does it say that the
license applies only to a machine. This would be idiocy. A machine
cannot buy a license , nor can a machine be legally bound by the legal
terms of a license. Obviously, the license applies to the ONE who
buys it, not to the machine.
No, friends, Microsoft is attempting to restate the XP license "ex
post facto", which is, of course, highly illegal in the US.
And Microsoft is illegally attempting to reinterpret the terms of both
the Retail and OEM licenses of XP.
Not only that, but the EULA PLAINLY states that the SOFTWARE is
licensed (another legal fiction).
Now, if Microsoft wants to change the Windows licensees, that is their
right. But ONCE they stated the terms of a license of XP in writing
in a court of law (as they HAD to do to sell it), they are BOUND
forever by those terms, just as the user becomes when he installs the
software and activates it. They cannot reinterpret the terms after
the fact.
So, while the Vista Licenses may be what they are, they are NOT XP
licenses, and never will be XP licenses.
What they ARE trying to do, however, is use the terms of an XP OEM
license as the RETAIL license for Vista, changing the wording a little
and replacing the name of the old product (XP) with a new name
(Vista), thus making ALL editions of Vista basically OEM editions (no
matter what you want to call them.) and THEN they are boldly trying
to reinterpret the XP license in the light of Vista's new license,
thus wiping out (so they think) the historical XP license.
This is called "re-writing history after the fact", or simply put,
"LYING through their teeth" about the terms of the XP license.
This one may turn me off toward Microsoft forever, no matter how much
I may like Vista.
Unless Microsoft makes a REAL distinction between the OEM Vista
license and the Retail Vista license, I will do all in my power to
show them up as the liars they are.
