Windows XP EULA

[Soju Monkey]

I have been told that I can leagally install my copy of
Windows XP Pro on both my desktop and laptop PC. Is this
true?

 

[Wesley]

No you cant do it legally. One license one computer.

--But heck what do I know I'm just 15--

 

[Donald Link]

NO! NO! Not legally and not illegally unless you have more knowledge.

 

[Don MacDougall]

I have been told that I can leagally install my copy of
Windows XP Pro on both my desktop and laptop PC. Is this
true?

No.

Your source may have been thinking of Office XP. The retail version of
Office XP can be so installed.

Don

 

[bob]

Hi,
What I am about to post was originally written for
another post. I'm apologize for my lazyness to change it.
So here it is, Here's how it boils down,

You pretty much need a key for every computer unless you
get an open lisence. If you buy one copy of windows XP,
you can buy additional licenses if you want to install it
more than once. These cost the same price as what ever
version of XP you bought, minus about 15%. You can also
only buy additional licenses if you have a retail version
of XP. Also, I think there is a limit to how many
additional lisences you can buy. I thought I read that
the other day on microsoft.com but now I can't find it.
You could also buy a volume license. I have no idea how
much it costs though. Here is the website that explains
it, http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/howtoacquire.asp.

Good Luck

 

[kurttrail]

I have been told that I can leagally install my copy of
Windows XP Pro on both my desktop and laptop PC. Is this
true?

Anyone that tells you that it is illegal, ask them what law prohibits
it! MS's EULA has never been enforced by a court on individuals for
private non-commercial use.

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

 

[Ken Blake]

I have been told that I can leagally install my copy of
Windows XP Pro on both my desktop and laptop PC. Is this
true?

You have been told wrong. That's true of Office, but not true of any version of Windows.

I'm starting to believe that all sentences beginning "I have been told that..." are followed by a falsehood.

 

[PCyr]

Oh boy! Here come the faithful MS users, MVP, and MS workers for another 50
post argument. Let's hope it doesn't happen. Anyways kurttrail, (I'm not
agreeing or disagreeing), what law says that it is alright, and what law is
MS apparently using to say that it's not?

--
Member of "Newsgroups are for everyone" (Perdita X. Dream is a
self-righteous, ruthless net-cop too!)

Email address is fake to prevent SPAM.
Real email address is pcyr2000 AT hotmail DOT com
Change the obvious to the obvious.
------------------

 

[EGMcCann]

*OFFICE* XP has that sort of license. Windows XP does not.

 

[kurttrail]

message Soju Monkey wrote:

I have been told that I can leagally install my copy of
Windows XP Pro on both my desktop and laptop PC. Is this
true?

Anyone that tells you that it is illegal, ask them what law
prohibits it! MS's EULA has never been enforced by a court on
individuals for private non-commercial use.

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

Oh boy! Here come the faithful MS users, MVP, and MS workers for
another 50 post argument. Let's hope it doesn't happen. Anyways
kurttrail, (I'm not agreeing or disagreeing), what law says that it
is alright, and what law is MS apparently using to say that it's
not?


Email address is fake to prevent SPAM.
Real email address is pcyr2000 AT hotmail DOT com
Change the obvious to the obvious.

It's the shrink-wrap and copyright laws he is trying to convince
everyone to believe his point of view. Personally I don't see it that
way, and I would be hesitant to recommend someone to put themselves
at risk to civil penalties [however remote the possibility] by
telling them they have the right to install on more than one computer
using the same license. At this time there is no definitive ruling
either way, the only truths are it has not been challenged
successfully by either MS or the consumer and activation can be
deceived by taking advantage of MS policy not to require personal
information or saying you are in compliance with the EULA when you
are not ; so it has not been defined.

Oh, and from most legal sources, the contract you agree to is usually
binding until proven otherwise. Just to refresh, to install on more
than one computer using the same XP license, you must break a
contract you agreed to. If you do not consciously and knowing break
this contract by refusing to supply information to this fact or by
saying you are in compliance with the EULA, you will not receive the
activation code to use your second install of XP using the same
license.
If the EULA is ruled binding, you could be liable and fined and or
sentenced to community service or jailed depending on the ruling.
Kurt is very brave giving his questionable advice.

Civil Court for contract disputes. It is not illegal to break a
contract in and of itself, and MS's prior knowledge of people doing the
same thing, and not trying to legally enforce their contract on them,
can be used against MS at trial too.

And don't think MS doesn't know, in the XP PA preview group I announced
that I broke the One Computer EULA term, and that was over two years
ago!

Until MS grows balls [which they haven't in over a decade] and sues to
prove their past-sale shrinkwrap license usage terms are legally
enforceable, who is the gonna be the Judge in your home, MS or you!

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

 

[kurttrail]

Oh boy! Here come the faithful MS users, MVP, and MS workers for
another 50 post argument. Let's hope it doesn't happen.

LOL! I hear you!

Anyways
kurttrail, (I'm not agreeing or disagreeing), what law says that it
is alright,

Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 117. - Limitations on exclusive rights:
Computer programs



(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy. -
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement
for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the
making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:



(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step
in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine
and that it is used in no other manner, or



(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and
that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued
possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.



The following is a translation of Section 117 (a) from the legalese
using MS's own definitions:



Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117. - Limitations on the exclusive rights of
Copyright Owners: Computer programs



(a) Making of Additional Installation by the Owner of a Copy of
Software. - It is not infringement for the owner of a copy of software
to make another installation provided:



(1) that such a new installation is made as a necessary step in making
use of the software together with a previously unknown computer and that
it is used in no other manner, or



"(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and
that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued
possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful"



Installation -

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?search=adaptation



made -

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?search=created



necessary -

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?search=essential



making use -

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?search=utilize



together with -

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?search=conjunction



a previously unknown -

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861582871



or -

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?search=or

and what law is MS apparently using to say that it's not?

MS doesn't use any copyright law to say it's illegal to install a
purchase copy of their software on more than one computer.

They use their post-sale shrickwrap license, as a law unto itself,
rewriting Copyright law at their own whim!

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

 

[Ted]

If the EULA is ruled binding, you could be liable and fined and or sentenced
to community service or jailed depending on the ruling.
Kurt is very brave giving his questionable advice.

Prove, by showing an official criminal code is written in the EULA, where one can jailed (being jailed would be the result of a criminal offense). Show a criminal statute that 100% supports the MS EULA. It only could be a civil offense, and no community service (that which would be the result of criminal activity) would be outcome either. MS, could as the plaintiff, get damages for one breaking an agreement, pure and simple. Nothing else can be done, in the regard of using the same copy of an MS operating disk, on multiple hardware platforms.

Personally, and I have stated this before, I disagree with kurt, if only that I agreed to the EULA when I use the product, and will not (out of conscience), use it multiple times. I figure, if one doesn't like the terms, there are alternatives. But kurt has very good points about what many here, ie, you, and especially Bwuce Chumpers, Ken *Doll* Blake, say, in that it is illegal, and a copyright violation (which means performing a criminal act). Copyright violation, would entail, making a copy of the media, then either selling it (which would be a very serious criminal offense), or by just giving it away for casual use. Possibly, lending another person ones copy for use, may be grounds for a violation. kurt, in no way, has ever said anything about making copies, or letting another person use the media(s) in question, just fair use personal use.

 

[David]

So since

it's *not* illegal, by *any* means, yes they *can* install it twice or
thrice or more, so long as it's used for private/home use only.

John

And, You got your lLaw Degree where??? What qualifications do you have to
provide Legal Advice?

David

 

[kurttrail]

And, You got your lLaw Degree where??? What qualifications do you
have to provide Legal Advice?

A human consumer that is not willing to believe that the words of a
convicted predatory monopolist is the LAW, without a shread of proof.
Too bad the MS apologists around here have the qualifications of being
illogical Conformists!

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

 

[PCyr]

I just went to http://microscum.kurttrail.com/mmpafaq/mmpafaq.htm, I say
**** MS. How easy is it to BS the reps?

--
Member of "Newsgroups are for everyone" (Perdita X. Dream is a
self-righteous, ruthless net-cop too!)

Email address is fake to prevent SPAM.
Real email address is pcyr2000 AT hotmail DOT com
Change the obvious to the obvious.
------------------

 

[JohnB_licks]

He's just a frustrated 41 yr old white guy, with a playground bully
mentality, who hides behind his keyboard, and hurls verbal ca ca that he
retrieves through a tube in his ear.

He will reap what he sows.

 

[kurttrail]

He's just a frustrated 41 yr old white guy, with a playground bully
mentality, who hides behind his keyboard, and hurls verbal ca ca that
he retrieves through a tube in his ear.

He will reap what he sows.

But John was right. David only questions the legal qualifications of
those who are opposed to PA and MS's EULA.

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

 

[David]

But John was right. David only questions the legal qualifications of
those who are opposed to PA and MS's EULA.


So since
it's *not* illegal, by *any* means, yes they *can* install it twice or
thrice or more, so long as it's used for private/home use only.

John

We ( Including you ) give your opinions on the validity of the EULA.

John B. Has made a statement, not an opini9on. He is telling the OP
that "It's not illegal". He is nopt sayinig this as his opinion, or
belief, but as a fact. Therfore, he is giving Legal Advice without a
license.

David

 

[kurttrail]

We ( Including you ) give your opinions on the validity of the EULA.

John B. Has made a statement, not an opini9on. He is telling the OP
that "It's not illegal". He is nopt sayinig this as his opinion, or
belief, but as a fact. Therfore, he is giving Legal Advice without a
license.

It has yet to be proven illegal in a court of law, and there is no law
that prohibits it, so the way things stand at the moment, it's not
illegal. It's just a contract term that's being broken. And it's not
illegal to break any contract, in and of itself, because there are
legitimate legal reason for breaking contracts. It's those that state
unequivocally that it is illegal, like Ken, Bruce the rest of the MS PA
Choir, that are presenting their assumptions as fact.

MS has had over a decade to enforce this term on an individual, but has
never tried to "legally" enforce it, by bringing it before a judge,
eventhough MS has known that people have broken this term! After over a
decade of maintaining the FUD surrounding this EULA term, MS is like the
boy that cried "Wolf" too many times. No reasonable person believes
them anymore, and for good cause! PA is just the newest weapon in MS's
One Computer FUD Campaign, to trick unsuspecting & naive individual
consumer into buying more copies of software than the really need.

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

 

[Lester Horwinkle]

You're correct about the license breaking. It's not illegal. It would come
down to a civil lawsuit, if MS ever cared to bring one.

However, certain blatant violations of copyright law can be punished under
criminal law. So take care.

But since the number of copies of Windows is in the millions, it's hard for
MS to contemplate lawsuits (or even investigations) to protect their
products, except against massive theft by pirate organizations.

So to protect themselves against the one-time small fry Windows pirate, they
invented PA. It will be partly effective, but can be broken (and has been).
That's okay from Microsoft's point of view. They're not out to make things
perfect ... just to make things better (for themselves). So if PA cuts
piracy by just a few percent, they've increased their revenue.