Pardon me for intercepting the button but I've been following it for a
number of days and this last post pushed my button.
Leythos, you seem to have taken the position of accepting the MS
position to avoid any future retribution should courts (if ever it
comes to that) find MS is correct. In my opionion that is an
illogical position to take and can become dangerous.
It may not make sense to you, but as you say below, I should be entitled
to my opinion. Since I have to comply with so many vendors license
restrictions, and so many clients rely on us to properly license their
environments, I'm not about to risk some "person's" interpretation that
may or may not stand up in court. It's not and has never been a money
issue, it's an issue of being able to be taken to court and not having the
money that MS does or the Anti-Piracy groups have. Legal is one thing,
being taken to court by a opponent with deeper pockets is another. It's
not like the ACLU is going to defend me if MS comes after me.
Guru's of various ilks have used and are using this tactic of
threatening potential future harm to coerce others into accepting
their "beliefs." This practice of threatening future harm is rampant
in many aspects of most societies. It is dangerous practice and has
led and will continue to lead to major problems.
Ah, but you see, it appears you are talking about Politics/Religion and
not Licensing. In licensing, if a vendor with DEEP POCKETS says you have
to comply with X and you're doing Y and refuse to do X, and they vendor
takes you to court, it costs you money to PROVE you're right. In the case
of large vendors like MS, there is nothing compelling anyone to use their
product, it's a CHOICE. Sure, you don't have to play by their rules, you
don't have to listen to them and you can do what ever you want - until a
action is brought against you. I don't know how much you pay for your
attorney, but our has never been cheap, in fact they charge more per hour
that I charge for most of the guys. In many cases, just having to prove
you are properly licensed can eat up more hours (and hours are free) than
the cost of having purchased the necessary licenses to start with.
Now, I don't follow the "Guru" or others. I read the EULA (on many MS
products), determined that I didn't have a clear definition of select
terms, and spent several days with a regional MS representative in order
to understand their licensing structure in addition to the documents
surrounding it. I have also read definitions on various terms and
conditions as listed on their site, not just the Systems Builder Site.
In my opnion, it is far better to have open discussions and allow each
individual to weigh the merits of the arguments without appealing to
to this fear mongoring.
I fully agree, but a discussion that entails foul language, maligning of
names, and trolling, is far from a discussion. Heck, even if I say
something nice about Kurts posting he gets bent out of shape and has to
resort to childish insults or trolling.
I also fully agree that individuals should discuss this and other issues,
but I don't consider it inappropriate or unjustified to license MS product
as MS intends them to be licensed, even if there is no legal precedent to
show that their license agreements or additional clarifications are
binding. As I said before, just the cost associated with one action of
being taken to court or audited can cost more than having purchasing the
proper licenses as MS "intends" you do purchase.
If this issue was just concerning my home systems, not business system, I
would side with Kurt, but he's missing that there is more to consider than
just his side. I'm fully willing to let Kurt be the test case, he seems
like he could do a good job at it. I am not willing to let my mother or
clients or my business be the test case.
Thanks for the feedback.
