M
Michael Stevens
" Ted" <""""> wrote in message
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.
K-man
Thanks for a post that is answerable, in a civil dispute, as the breaking of
a contract would be what was ruled on, the terms of punishment are not set,
and could be anything from community service, monetary fine, or jail if the
judge so deems. That is why they are called judges.
I don't say it is illegal, I say it is either a violation of the EULA, or
the user in knowingly in non-compliance of the EULA. Nether has been
declared illegal, but have not been declared legal either. Kurt continues to
quote the copyright limitations of Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117
Limitations on the exclusive rights of Copyright Owners: Computer programs
I don't understand how making a copy of the CD is an essential step in the
setup of XP on the original system or where it suggests the CD copy is
essential and the license key is also valid without the removal of the
original install of XP. For some reason, I see using the backup copy as 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. Would mean the backup copy would still be
bound by the same EULA as the original.
--
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
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.
K-man
Thanks for a post that is answerable, in a civil dispute, as the breaking of
a contract would be what was ruled on, the terms of punishment are not set,
and could be anything from community service, monetary fine, or jail if the
judge so deems. That is why they are called judges.
I don't say it is illegal, I say it is either a violation of the EULA, or
the user in knowingly in non-compliance of the EULA. Nether has been
declared illegal, but have not been declared legal either. Kurt continues to
quote the copyright limitations of Title 17 Chapter 1 Section 117
Limitations on the exclusive rights of Copyright Owners: Computer programs
I don't understand how making a copy of the CD is an essential step in the
setup of XP on the original system or where it suggests the CD copy is
essential and the license key is also valid without the removal of the
original install of XP. For some reason, I see using the backup copy as 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. Would mean the backup copy would still be
bound by the same EULA as the original.
--
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