My pc mother board has died - Install xp oem

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
kurttrail said:
Now you are an out and out liar, Carey.

"The term "COMPUTER" as used herein shall
mean the HARDWARE, if the HARDWARE is a
single computer system, or shall mean the
computer system with which the HARDWARE
operates, if the HARDWARE is a computer
system component." - OEM EULA

Nowhere in the EULA does it say anything like "Hardware =
Motherboard!"
Click to expand...

Remember how I asked you guys for book recommendations a few weeks back?

Well, the book arrived on the 26th, and I've been pretty busy reading
it, although I'm still trying to read as much here as I can.

From /Microsoft Windows XP InsideOut/, written by Ed Bott, Carl Siechert
and Craig Stinson, and published by Microsoft Press:

"Copies of Windows XP sold with new computers may be exempt from WPA. If
you purchase a new computer on which Windows XP is pre-installed, the
activation process may have been completed before you took delivery. In
addition, copies of Windows sold this way are frequently tied via
software to the BIOS of that computer (this method of installation is
called System Locked Pre-Installation, or SLP). You may reinstall that
copy of Windows XP an unlimited number of times on the computer it came
with, regardless of how many upgrades you make, as long as you don’t
change the BIOS. In fact, **you can replace the motherboard on a system
activated with SLP as long as the new part is from the same manufacturer
and uses the same BIOS identifier.** However, you may be prohibited by
the license agreement from transferring that copy of Windows to another
computer."

[emphasis supplied]

My EULA--from a computer that came from Dell in January--says, in part:


The term "COMPUTER" as used herein shall mean the
HARDWARE, if the HARDWARE is a single
computer system, or shall mean the computer system
with which the HARDWARE operates, if the
HARDWARE is a computer system component.

1. GRANT OF LICENSE.
Manufacturer grants you the following rights provided that
you comply with all terms and conditions of this EULA:

1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access,
display and run one copy of the SOFTWARE on
the COMPUTER. The SOFTWARE may not be used
by more than two (2) processors at any one time on the
COMPUTER, unless a higher number is
indicated on the COA.

1.2 SOFTWARE as a Component of the COMPUTER - Transfer.
This license may not be shared, transferred to or used
concurrently on different computers. The SOFTWARE
is licensed with the COMPUTER as a single integrated
product and may only be used with the COMPUTER.
If the SOFTWARE is not accompanied by HARDWARE,
you may not use the SOFTWARE. You may permanently
transfer all of your rights under this EULA only as
part of a permanent sale or transfer of the COMPUTER,
provided you retain no copies of the SOFTWARE.
If the SOFTWARE is an upgrade, any transfer
must also include all prior versions of the
SOFTWARE. This transfer must also include
the Certificate of Authenticity label. The transfer
may not be an indirect transfer, such as a consignment.
Prior to the transfer, the end user receiving the
Software must agree to all the EULA terms.

1.3 Mandatory Activation. The license rights granted
under this EULA are limited to the first thirty (30)
days after you first install the SOFTWARE unless
you supply information required to activate your
licensed copy in the manner described during the
setup sequence of the SOFTWARE. You can activate
the SOFTWARE through the use of the Internet or
telephone; toll charges may apply. You may also
need to reactivate the SOFTWARE if you modify your
computer hardware or alter the SOFTWARE. There
are technological measures in this SOFTWARE that
are designed to prevent unlicensed use of the
SOFTWARE. Microsoft will use those measures to
confirm you have a legally licensed copy of the
SOFTWARE. If you are not using a licensed copy
of the SOFTWARE, you are not allowed to install
the SOFTWARE or future SOFTWARE
updates. Microsoft Licensing, GP, Microsoft Ireland
Operations Limited and/or Microsoft (China) Co.
Limited (collectively "MS"), Microsoft Corporation
and its subsidiaries will not collect any personally
identifiable information from your COMPUTER during
this process.

I read it and then I searched it, and I failed to find any reference to
BIOS or motherboard.

rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Insisting on perfect safety is for people
without the balls to live in the real world.
Mary Shafer Iliff
 
Wow!



Rhonda Lea Kirk said:
kurttrail said:
Now you are an out and out liar, Carey.

"The term "COMPUTER" as used herein shall
mean the HARDWARE, if the HARDWARE is a
single computer system, or shall mean the
computer system with which the HARDWARE
operates, if the HARDWARE is a computer
system component." - OEM EULA

Nowhere in the EULA does it say anything like "Hardware =
Motherboard!"
Click to expand...

Remember how I asked you guys for book recommendations a few weeks back?

Well, the book arrived on the 26th, and I've been pretty busy reading
it, although I'm still trying to read as much here as I can.

From /Microsoft Windows XP InsideOut/, written by Ed Bott, Carl Siechert
and Craig Stinson, and published by Microsoft Press:

"Copies of Windows XP sold with new computers may be exempt from WPA. If
you purchase a new computer on which Windows XP is pre-installed, the
activation process may have been completed before you took delivery. In
addition, copies of Windows sold this way are frequently tied via
software to the BIOS of that computer (this method of installation is
called System Locked Pre-Installation, or SLP). You may reinstall that
copy of Windows XP an unlimited number of times on the computer it came
with, regardless of how many upgrades you make, as long as you don't
change the BIOS. In fact, **you can replace the motherboard on a system
activated with SLP as long as the new part is from the same manufacturer
and uses the same BIOS identifier.** However, you may be prohibited by
the license agreement from transferring that copy of Windows to another
computer."

[emphasis supplied]

My EULA--from a computer that came from Dell in January--says, in part:


The term "COMPUTER" as used herein shall mean the
HARDWARE, if the HARDWARE is a single
computer system, or shall mean the computer system
with which the HARDWARE operates, if the
HARDWARE is a computer system component.

1. GRANT OF LICENSE.
Manufacturer grants you the following rights provided that
you comply with all terms and conditions of this EULA:

1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access,
display and run one copy of the SOFTWARE on
the COMPUTER. The SOFTWARE may not be used
by more than two (2) processors at any one time on the
COMPUTER, unless a higher number is
indicated on the COA.

1.2 SOFTWARE as a Component of the COMPUTER - Transfer.
This license may not be shared, transferred to or used
concurrently on different computers. The SOFTWARE
is licensed with the COMPUTER as a single integrated
product and may only be used with the COMPUTER.
If the SOFTWARE is not accompanied by HARDWARE,
you may not use the SOFTWARE. You may permanently
transfer all of your rights under this EULA only as
part of a permanent sale or transfer of the COMPUTER,
provided you retain no copies of the SOFTWARE.
If the SOFTWARE is an upgrade, any transfer
must also include all prior versions of the
SOFTWARE. This transfer must also include
the Certificate of Authenticity label. The transfer
may not be an indirect transfer, such as a consignment.
Prior to the transfer, the end user receiving the
Software must agree to all the EULA terms.

1.3 Mandatory Activation. The license rights granted
under this EULA are limited to the first thirty (30)
days after you first install the SOFTWARE unless
you supply information required to activate your
licensed copy in the manner described during the
setup sequence of the SOFTWARE. You can activate
the SOFTWARE through the use of the Internet or
telephone; toll charges may apply. You may also
need to reactivate the SOFTWARE if you modify your
computer hardware or alter the SOFTWARE. There
are technological measures in this SOFTWARE that
are designed to prevent unlicensed use of the
SOFTWARE. Microsoft will use those measures to
confirm you have a legally licensed copy of the
SOFTWARE. If you are not using a licensed copy
of the SOFTWARE, you are not allowed to install
the SOFTWARE or future SOFTWARE
updates. Microsoft Licensing, GP, Microsoft Ireland
Operations Limited and/or Microsoft (China) Co.
Limited (collectively "MS"), Microsoft Corporation
and its subsidiaries will not collect any personally
identifiable information from your COMPUTER during
this process.

I read it and then I searched it, and I failed to find any reference to
BIOS or motherboard.

rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Insisting on perfect safety is for people
without the balls to live in the real world.
Mary Shafer Iliff
Click to expand...
 
CRaven said:
Since you are all discussing Installing OEM software - and have all
given the impression that you have installed OEM software - you are
entitled to register at oem.microsoft.com

The page that provides you with the information which confirms both My
ansewers and careys is :
http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?PageID=552846#faq3

Alias - Check what you are talking about befor you make arsumptions
Click to expand...

Mr. or Ms. Raven,

I have read my EULA, which is one that shipped with a Dell computer in
January, so I suspect it is the most recent version.

The page you linked above is inaccessible to most of us, so it cannot
be a part of the discussion, unless you want to post the text of it
here.

Legal agreements are construed against the drafter of the agreement,
which in this case is Microsoft. What that means is that in any court
action, unless Microsoft has clearly stated--in the EULA--what you are
saying above, it will lose.

And my EULA doesn't say what you're saying.

It doesn't really matter what Microsoft tells its partners. There are a
lot of precedents for representations outside the agreement and about
side agreements, and with very rare exceptions, the representations and
side agreements fail if they are contrary to the language of the
agreement.

It has always been interesting to me to observe laymen interpret
legalese. Rest assured, however, that in the end, the legalese will not
be interpreted by an employee at Microsoft, but by someone who actually
understands what all the terms of art mean. Microsoft has good lawyers
and they understand this, and the EULA was written to satisfy
longstanding legal requirements. I'm quite sure that they said what they
meant and they meant what they said, regardless of your understanding of
the situation.

In the meantime, you appear to be erroneously interpreting a legal
document to the detriment of others, based upon your employment by
Microsoft.

Given the OPs description of her problem, she has a perfect right to use
her current license to reinstall the software. It is wrong of you to
give her erroneous legal advice that will ultimately cost her money and
leave her possessed of an additional license she does not need.

Has anyone ever explained to you the consequences of practicing law
without a license?

rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Insisting on perfect safety is for people
without the balls to live in the real world.
Mary Shafer Iliff
 
Hi Rhonda,

Those of us that do have access to that site CANNOT post what is there due
to NDA restrictions.

That being said, I have to agree with the assertion that if it isn't
available to the public then it doesn't apply to the public.
A lot of us have asked that MS publish these changes on the public side of
the site, but no joy so far.

--
Larry Samuels Associate Expert
MS-MVP (2001-2005)
Unofficial FAQ for Windows Server 2003 at
http://pelos.us/SERVER.htm
Expert Zone-
 
Larry said:
Hi Rhonda,

Those of us that do have access to that site CANNOT post what is
there due to NDA restrictions.

That being said, I have to agree with the assertion that if it isn't
available to the public then it doesn't apply to the public.
A lot of us have asked that MS publish these changes on the public
side of the site, but no joy so far.
Click to expand...

Hi Larry :)

I suppose it's just like any other business--someone has to get around
to it...and sometimes that just takes time.

But whatever is on that site is not the agreement between Microsoft and
the consumer--the EULA is the sum total of the agreement, and if the
EULA doesn't say it, then it doesn't bind the consumer to anything.

So the site isn't relevant, and the only danger here is that an employee
of Microsoft is making representations (in an official capacity, no
less, given the signature on the posts) that appear to be untrue.

I'm not a lawyer, btw. I'm just a lowly paralegal with 22 years in
general practice, including corporate law and litigation (although what
I do best are real estate and estate planning). So while I'm not
competent to give legal advice, I do know how to read and understand a
legal document.

rl
 
I fail to see where "Mr. or Ms. Raven" stated he or she
was a Microsoft employee. Your assumption is wrong,
and the remainder of your post is also categorically wrong.

Case dismissed!

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows - Shell/User
Microsoft Community Newsgroups
news://msnews.microsoft.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------­----------------

:

| CRaven wrote:
| > Since you are all discussing Installing OEM software - and have all
| > given the impression that you have installed OEM software - you are
| > entitled to register at oem.microsoft.com
| >
| > The page that provides you with the information which confirms both My
| > ansewers and careys is :
| > http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?PageID=552846#faq3
| >
| > Alias - Check what you are talking about befor you make arsumptions
|
| Mr. or Ms. Raven,
|
| I have read my EULA, which is one that shipped with a Dell computer in
| January, so I suspect it is the most recent version.
|
| The page you linked above is inaccessible to most of us, so it cannot
| be a part of the discussion, unless you want to post the text of it
| here.
|
| Legal agreements are construed against the drafter of the agreement,
| which in this case is Microsoft. What that means is that in any court
| action, unless Microsoft has clearly stated--in the EULA--what you are
| saying above, it will lose.
|
| And my EULA doesn't say what you're saying.
|
| It doesn't really matter what Microsoft tells its partners. There are a
| lot of precedents for representations outside the agreement and about
| side agreements, and with very rare exceptions, the representations and
| side agreements fail if they are contrary to the language of the
| agreement.
|
| It has always been interesting to me to observe laymen interpret
| legalese. Rest assured, however, that in the end, the legalese will not
| be interpreted by an employee at Microsoft, but by someone who actually
| understands what all the terms of art mean. Microsoft has good lawyers
| and they understand this, and the EULA was written to satisfy
| longstanding legal requirements. I'm quite sure that they said what they
| meant and they meant what they said, regardless of your understanding of
| the situation.
|
| In the meantime, you appear to be erroneously interpreting a legal
| document to the detriment of others, based upon your employment by
| Microsoft.
|
| Given the OPs description of her problem, she has a perfect right to use
| her current license to reinstall the software. It is wrong of you to
| give her erroneous legal advice that will ultimately cost her money and
| leave her possessed of an additional license she does not need.
|
| Has anyone ever explained to you the consequences of practicing law
| without a license?
|
| rl
| --
| Rhonda Lea Kirk
|
| Insisting on perfect safety is for people
| without the balls to live in the real world.
| Mary Shafer Iliff
 
Hi Rhonda,

MVPs are absolutely *NOT* Microsoft employees. In fact, there is a clause in
the agreement that if a MVP is hired by MS that they have to give up their
MVP status.

You can get more info on who MVPs are and what the program is about at



--
Larry Samuels Associate Expert
MS-MVP (2001-2005)
Unofficial FAQ for Windows Server 2003 at
http://pelos.us/SERVER.htm
Expert Zone-
 
Larry said:
Hi Rhonda,

MVPs are absolutely *NOT* Microsoft employees. In fact, there is a
clause in the agreement that if a MVP is hired by MS that they have
to give up their MVP status.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about an MVP. I haven't seen *any* MVP write anything I
would consider actionable.

I was talking about CRaven, who holds him/herself out to be a "Microsoft
Certified Technology Specialist, Microsoft Licensing Sales Specialist,
and Microsoft Small Business Specialist." It may be, however, that I
have misinterpreted these titles, and that s/he does not work for
Microsoft, but has simply been endowed with special magical powers. In
which case, if I were Microsoft, I'd take them back soonest.
You can get more info on who MVPs are and what the program is about at
Click to expand...

Read it already. I've been really, really busy these last few weeks with
all the reading I've been doing (I'm currently unemployed, so I have
time), and my eyes hurt. :)

I think you guys (to include both men and women MVPs) are terrific to
give your time and that you do a wonderful job. I've learned a lot here.

I just didn't like CRaven's attitude--it was a little too haughty for my
taste, so I expressed myself in a tone to match. :)

rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Insisting on perfect safety is for people
without the balls to live in the real world.
Mary Shafer Iliff
 
Carey said:
I fail to see where "Mr. or Ms. Raven" stated he or she
was a Microsoft employee.
Click to expand...

Please see my reply to Larry. I saw three titles below his/her name:
Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist, Microsoft Licensing Sales
Specialist, Microsoft Small Business Specialist. I also admitted that I
may have misunderstood the meaning of these titles, but they certainly
look like job titles to me.
Your assumption is wrong,
and the remainder of your post is also categorically wrong.
Click to expand...

How so?
Case dismissed!
Click to expand...

Judges only talk like that on TV. :)

A good argument (not a food fight, but an argument, in the philosophical
or legal sense), consists of a premise, evidence for the premise, and a
conclusion.

An assertion is not an argument. I can't do anything with what you
wrote, because I don't know what you're saying.

I do know that I am not a person who has been picking at you or trying
to get your goat, so treating me as if I am hardly seems like the right
thing to do.

In the world I live in, the agreement is the agreement, and that's what
the EULA is--an agreement. So it doesn't matter what people say about
the EULA, it only matters what the EULA says about itself. I even
doublechecked--because sometimes an agreement of this sort will say
something along the lines of "continued use of <product> after a change
in the terms of this agreement implies consent to the new terms"--but I
didn't find anything in my EULA to indicate that the agreement can be
changed, unless a new EULA becomes applicable as the result of a
software up(or down)grade. I expect that's because such changes have to
be announced in a way that the company has reasonable certainty the
consumer will have access to them, and I don't imagine Microsoft wants
to send out that many letters.

I don't have a horse in this race, Carey. In other words, I am without
an ax to grind. And there's a reason for that:

I remember when everyone used bootlegged software (and a lot of those
people were lawyers, go figure). I remember different software companies
trying out one or another software protection scheme because they were
starving while everyone and his brother were using their product without
paying for it. I remember when most people didn't pay their shareware
fees, because there was no way to force them to do so. I remember people
asking to borrow my disks because they didn't want to shell out the
bucks for whatever program it happened to be, although that didn't
happen too often to me, because I was using a Mac.

I also remember a brief time when support was free (and an earlier time
when there was no support at all, except peer support), and even people
with bootlegged copies could call up and get help, because that's just
the way things were.

It was wrong (I always paid for my software), and I can understand why
Microsoft has gone to the lengths it has to protect its intellectual
property. But I don't think that attempts to interpret the agreement to
force an end-user to buy an additional license for a product s/he
already owns (just because his/her computer blew up, which is what the
OP was asking about) is what anyone had in mind. It's certainly not what
my EULA says, and I doubt I am unique.

If I were the original poster, I would just write to (not call)
Microsoft, and ask for a determination, because this thread is totally
out of control.

rl
 
Rhonda said:
kurttrail said:
Now you are an out and out liar, Carey.

"The term "COMPUTER" as used herein shall
mean the HARDWARE, if the HARDWARE is a
single computer system, or shall mean the
computer system with which the HARDWARE
operates, if the HARDWARE is a computer
system component." - OEM EULA

Nowhere in the EULA does it say anything like "Hardware =
Motherboard!"
Click to expand...

Remember how I asked you guys for book recommendations a few weeks
back?
Well, the book arrived on the 26th, and I've been pretty busy reading
it, although I'm still trying to read as much here as I can.

From /Microsoft Windows XP InsideOut/, written by Ed Bott, Carl
Siechert and Craig Stinson, and published by Microsoft Press:

"Copies of Windows XP sold with new computers may be exempt from WPA.
If you purchase a new computer on which Windows XP is pre-installed,
the activation process may have been completed before you took
delivery. In addition, copies of Windows sold this way are frequently
tied via software to the BIOS of that computer (this method of
installation is called System Locked Pre-Installation, or SLP). You
may reinstall that copy of Windows XP an unlimited number of times on
the computer it came with, regardless of how many upgrades you make,
as long as you don’t change the BIOS. In fact, **you can replace the
motherboard on a system activated with SLP as long as the new part is
from the same manufacturer and uses the same BIOS identifier.**
However, you may be prohibited by the license agreement from
transferring that copy of Windows to another computer."

[emphasis supplied]

My EULA--from a computer that came from Dell in January--says, in
part:

The term "COMPUTER" as used herein shall mean the
HARDWARE, if the HARDWARE is a single
computer system, or shall mean the computer system
with which the HARDWARE operates, if the
HARDWARE is a computer system component.

1. GRANT OF LICENSE.
Manufacturer grants you the following rights provided that
you comply with all terms and conditions of this EULA:

1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access,
display and run one copy of the SOFTWARE on
the COMPUTER. The SOFTWARE may not be used
by more than two (2) processors at any one time on the
COMPUTER, unless a higher number is
indicated on the COA.

1.2 SOFTWARE as a Component of the COMPUTER - Transfer.
This license may not be shared, transferred to or used
concurrently on different computers. The SOFTWARE
is licensed with the COMPUTER as a single integrated
product and may only be used with the COMPUTER.
If the SOFTWARE is not accompanied by HARDWARE,
you may not use the SOFTWARE. You may permanently
transfer all of your rights under this EULA only as
part of a permanent sale or transfer of the COMPUTER,
provided you retain no copies of the SOFTWARE.
If the SOFTWARE is an upgrade, any transfer
must also include all prior versions of the
SOFTWARE. This transfer must also include
the Certificate of Authenticity label. The transfer
may not be an indirect transfer, such as a consignment.
Prior to the transfer, the end user receiving the
Software must agree to all the EULA terms.

1.3 Mandatory Activation. The license rights granted
under this EULA are limited to the first thirty (30)
days after you first install the SOFTWARE unless
you supply information required to activate your
licensed copy in the manner described during the
setup sequence of the SOFTWARE. You can activate
the SOFTWARE through the use of the Internet or
telephone; toll charges may apply. You may also
need to reactivate the SOFTWARE if you modify your
computer hardware or alter the SOFTWARE. There
are technological measures in this SOFTWARE that
are designed to prevent unlicensed use of the
SOFTWARE. Microsoft will use those measures to
confirm you have a legally licensed copy of the
SOFTWARE. If you are not using a licensed copy
of the SOFTWARE, you are not allowed to install
the SOFTWARE or future SOFTWARE
updates. Microsoft Licensing, GP, Microsoft Ireland
Operations Limited and/or Microsoft (China) Co.
Limited (collectively "MS"), Microsoft Corporation
and its subsidiaries will not collect any personally
identifiable information from your COMPUTER during
this process.

I read it and then I searched it, and I failed to find any reference
to BIOS or motherboard.
Click to expand...

Nor is there any reference to the motherboard in any Windows XP OEM EULA
from XP Gold to MCE 2005.

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."
 
Larry said:
Hi Rhonda,

Those of us that do have access to that site CANNOT post what is
there due to NDA restrictions.

That being said, I have to agree with the assertion that if it isn't
available to the public then it doesn't apply to the public.
A lot of us have asked that MS publish these changes on the public
side of the site, but no joy so far.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't care if MS hired planes with banners to get the message
public, none of that motherboard is the computer crap is in any license
any user agreed to.

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."
 
Larry said:
Hi Rhonda,

Those of us that do have access to that site CANNOT post what is
there due to NDA restrictions. <snip>
Click to expand...

The NDA restrictions haven't stopped Carey.

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."
 
LOL Gotcha now.
Those are sales title "certifications" used by members of the partners
program. Definitely not employee titles.

--
Larry Samuels Associate Expert
MS-MVP (2001-2005)
Unofficial FAQ for Windows Server 2003 at
http://pelos.us/SERVER.htm
Expert Zone-
 
Larry said:
LOL Gotcha now.
Those are sales title "certifications" used by members of the partners
program. Definitely not employee titles.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Larry, for the clarification. :)

It kinda reminds of the corporate practice of the 80s when everyone gave
business cards (to low level employees) in lieu of a pay raise.

Sheesh!

rl
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

Calvin: "Do you think our morality is defined by our actions
or by what's in our hearts?"
Hobbes: "I think our actions *show* what is in our hearts."
Calvin: "I RESENT THAT!"
 
Rhonda said:
If I were the original poster, I would just write to (not call)
Microsoft, and ask for a determination, because this thread is totally
out of control.
Click to expand...

Amen to that. But sometimes late in the evening or the
wee early hours of the morning, one of the best shows in
town is the Carey vs. Kurt, Alias, and gang show.
 
KDagnell said:
Hi there,

My motherboard has died and I need to transfer reinstall Windows off my
oem
disk - a friend tells me that this would breach lisencing and I need a new
version!

Is this true and is there anything else that I should know regarding this?
Click to expand...

Don't see any persons here qualified to provide legal advice, just their
opinions.

You seem to be implying that you're replacing the motherboard. If this is
incorrect, ignore further. My experience shows with XP generic OEM, when
swapping motherboards, MS doesn't give hoot. Even when you call them for a
product ID explaining the situation truthfully.

A recovery CD provides incorrect drivers for different motherboard, and its
internals. As does a specific XP OEM install CD. If the same or highly
similar motherboard, no sweat.

The legality question, am not qualified to answer that without any
background in that area.
 
Rhonda said:
If I were the original poster, I would just write to (not call)
Microsoft, and ask for a determination, because this thread is totally
out of control.
Click to expand...

Then should IBM have written SCO for their interpretation of the UNIX
license? I think not.

It is quite simple. Read the EULA and the SBL and make a determination
for yourself.

The EULA never says a freakin' word about the motherboard, and the SBL
only mentions the motherboard once. "A "fully assembled computer
system" means a computer system consisting of at least a central
processing unit, a motherboard, a hard drive, a power supply, and a
case." The motherboard is only one of 5 components that make up a
"fully assembled computer system." The SBL does NOT specify that one of
these five components is greater than the others.

So what is agreed to is very simple. Carey's nonsense is not included
in any license that has been agreed to.

It's so simple that only idiots and people with their heads up their own
butt cannot see it.

http://carey.microscum.com

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."
 
Jonny said:
Don't see any persons here qualified to provide legal advice, just
their opinions.

You seem to be implying that you're replacing the motherboard. If
this is incorrect, ignore further. My experience shows with XP
generic OEM, when swapping motherboards, MS doesn't give hoot. Even
when you call them for a product ID explaining the situation
truthfully.
A recovery CD provides incorrect drivers for different motherboard,
and its internals. As does a specific XP OEM install CD. If the
same or highly similar motherboard, no sweat.

The legality question, am not qualified to answer that without any
background in that area.
Click to expand...

Can you read? If so, then you should see for yourself that this
motherboard cannot be changed nonsense is not part of any license that
was agreed to. I doesn't take a law degree to see that.

This is not a legal opinion, just friggin' common sense.

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."
 
kurttrail said:
The NDA restrictions haven't stopped Carey.
Click to expand...

My understanding is if it can be googled it isn't restricted by the NDA.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=microsoft+oem+license&btnG=Google+Search

It's the second hit and you don't need a password to access it. Also note
there is no mention of the motherboard in the publicly accessible document.
I don't know of any publicly accessible documents that say the motherboard
defines the computer. In any case even if it is on a web site I don't see
how that would have anything to do with amending the end user's license. It
is conceivable that an end user may not have Internet access and even if
they do why would they search for an amended license agreement. Until
Microsoft puts this (motherboard defines the computer) in a EULA that the
end user agrees to I don't see how it can be legally enforced. In practice
they can try to enforce it though activations but it would be interesting to
see it challenged in court. I often change motherboards for customers. So
far I have never been refused activation.
 
It is quite simple. Read the EULA and the SBL and make a
determination for yourself.
Click to expand...

I agree. But I'm not the original poster, who *didn't* read the EULA
(probably can't since her computer is down) and who is now getting a
very long thread full of "expert" answers, not all of which agree.

Look, I didn't realize that CRaven person is not an employee of
Microsoft--s/he certainly went out of his/her way to look "official"
with all the titles below his/her name--so why would any other casual
user have that knowledge? If I were the person asking that
question...well, I read what you and Alias write pretty closely, Kurt,
and for that reason, I trust your answers, but for someone who pops in
to solve a single problem...it's a problem.

Who are you (the generic you, not the "Kurt you", because you're a
skeptic if ever there was one)going to heed? The poster with the string
of titles or the poster who either has no sig or a sig with a a parody
website and an apparent axe to grind?

Apart from the philosophical and interpretative line of the thread,
there is still a real live human being with a problem, and she came here
to get it solved. She has touched off a food fight, but she still
doesn't have a definitive determination, and if that's what she really
wants, then the thing to do is go straight to the horse.

rl
 
Back
Top