Windows XP OEM License

[Alex Nichol]

After a quick review, Heres whats new, you change all hardware with windows
xp oem , except, the circuit board (mobo), if you change this, you have to
get a new license in order to activate( exception using the same
board-defective replacement, maybe or maybe not),

That only applies in the case of a system that has been BIOS locked to
the motherboard by the makers. Where you buy a regular type OEM CD and
install it yourself, the interpretation of whether changing things
amounts to transfer to a different machine, outside the terms of the
EULA, is not well defined; and will be up to the activation agents if
you attempt to activate by phone. My guess would be that if the changes
are enough for the system at boot to think it is not the original or
substantially the same hardware, then it is falling outside the EULA.

 

[Alex Nichol]

I'm in exactly the same situation. (Twice actually since I
built both my computer and my wife's.) I asked a question
similar to yours in this or a related newsgroup and the best
answer I got was that in order to be an OEM one must have
entered into an OEM agreement with Microsoft.

Since I have not, I am legally not an OEM. These computers
therefore don't have OEMs. I guess they're parthenogenetic
or something.

These 'OEM' CDs sold as retail are an anomaly that ought to be cleared
up. IMO they should not exist at all: the system should either be part
of a complete machine, installed by the makers, and the license die with
it; or they should be retail without strings on transfer - at a retail
sort of price.

 

[Opinicus]

These 'OEM' CDs sold as retail are an anomaly that ought
to be cleared
up. IMO they should not exist at all: the system should
either be part
of a complete machine, installed by the makers, and the
license die with

OK, let's explore this idea. I buy a bunch of parts and an
OEM version of Windows whatever. I assemble the parts. I
install Windows on the machine. What does that make me? What
does that make the machine? What part of the machine must
"die" so that the license "dies with it"?

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

You are not an OEM since you do not have an agreement with Microsoft.
For a definitive answer you would need to contact Microsoft legal.

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Michael;
I seems you just asked in that newsgroup.
The response could be interesting.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/

The reference on your site is hearsay at best since there is no
authoritative source cited.
You even state "The above post was copied from a post from
kurttrail
posted to the msnews.microsoft.com newsgroups and is supplied as
is."
Since you state "as is" it seems you are distancing yourself from
the
information Kurt provided.
It seems more like it is Kurt's interpretation and even you are not
convinced much since you say "as is".

The reference from there "Not convinced" says nothing specifically
about the motherboard.
I looked through the Microsoft site again and did not see anything
specifically stating the motherboard was the determining factor.
Of course there were many pages and I could have missed it.

I am convinced, and it is not hearsay. I don't always agree with
Kurt, but what reason would he have to post a false reply from The
Microsoft OEM System Builder Licensing Team? I can't think of a
reason myself since he is such a stickler for accuracy.
If you can access this link,
http://communities.microsoft.com/ne...newsgroup=microsoft.communities.oem.licensing
try asking the Microsoft OEM System Builder Licensing Team [ I would
consider this an authoritative source ] what their policy as it
pertains to OEM XP and MB changes. Please post back with the reply
if you get one and I will use it to update my web page.
I posted the information as a service to users of OEM software what
they could expect if they swap motherboards and have to make a phone
call activation. They might just rethink their upgrade purchases.
I am not trying to be difficult, but I posted the source of the
article not as a disclaimer but as a qualifier. The "as is" means
this is exactly from where I obtained the information. If I wanted
to distance myself, I would not have published the web page at all.

--
Michael Stevens MS-MVP XP
(e-mail address removed)
http://michaelstevenstech.com

JJ,
The link on my web site is directly from the Microsoft OEM system
builders newsgroups, and according to replies from The Microsoft
OEM System Builder Licensing Team.
This does seem to define the terms of the EULA. The notes are my
own.
http://michaelstevenstech.com/oemeula.htm
--
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



After a quick review, Heres whats new, you change all hardware
with
windows
xp oem , except, the circuit board (mobo), if you change this,
you
have to
get a new license in order to activate( exception using the same
board-defective replacement, maybe or maybe not), MS has said
also
that may
change this oem license exception " in the future ", what will
get
them to
change this ? if enough winxp oem cd owners , request Microsoft
change this,
this will do it and allow migration of winxp to newer differnet
circuit
boards ( made for xp that is) Feel free to comment on this MS
has
several
places where customers may request new features, ect, so they
are
listening.
Rho_1r [VIP] ,,,lol

 

[Alex Nichol]

OK, let's explore this idea. I buy a bunch of parts and an
OEM version of Windows whatever. I assemble the parts. I
install Windows on the machine. What does that make me? What
does that make the machine? What part of the machine must
"die" so that the license "dies with it"?

An anomaly, and undefined. I have drawn attention to the anomalies at a
very high level; but am not holding my breath

 

[jt3]

I know I've said this before, but the original OEM approach was apparently a
de facto multi-layered pricing scheme which worked to MS's
advantage--allowing increased volume of sales without the cost of support.
The newer approach in effect merely increases the effective price of the OEM
package by making it less portable, so there's really no reason to expect MS
to change their approach on it. I'd not have bought the OEM version had I
been aware of the *activation* policy at the time--that's my only gripe in
the matter. Naturally, the salesman said nothing about it. Caveat emptor
is fine, but there's a lot of twists and turns to expect everyone to be
aware of.

Joe

 

[Michael Stevens]

Michael;
I seems you just asked in that newsgroup.
The response could be interesting.

JJ,
See updated link with reply to my query. Also check out the links listed in
the reply for more confirmation of my original information on my XP OEM
Clarification web page. I don't adhere to Kurt's philosophy, but I could not
see any reason for him posting false information from an official MS source.
The "The Microsoft OEM System Builder Licensing Team" stated reasoning for
ending the life of an OEM license was support related. The OEM is
responsible for the support and it would not be reasonable they would be
required to support a system with a new motherboard and CPU. But that brings
up more questions on who is the OEM when purchased with hardware.
I am only the messenger, so don't shoot me.

OEMEULA clarification.
http://michaelstevenstech.com/oemeula.htm
--
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

The reference on your site is hearsay at best since there is no
authoritative source cited.
You even state "The above post was copied from a post from
kurttrail
posted to the msnews.microsoft.com newsgroups and is supplied as
is."
Since you state "as is" it seems you are distancing yourself from
the
information Kurt provided.
It seems more like it is Kurt's interpretation and even you are not
convinced much since you say "as is".

The reference from there "Not convinced" says nothing specifically
about the motherboard.
I looked through the Microsoft site again and did not see anything
specifically stating the motherboard was the determining factor.
Of course there were many pages and I could have missed it.

I am convinced, and it is not hearsay. I don't always agree with
Kurt, but what reason would he have to post a false reply from The
Microsoft OEM System Builder Licensing Team? I can't think of a
reason myself since he is such a stickler for accuracy.
If you can access this link,
http://communities.microsoft.com/ne...newsgroup=microsoft.communities.oem.licensing
try asking the Microsoft OEM System Builder Licensing Team [ I would
consider this an authoritative source ] what their policy as it
pertains to OEM XP and MB changes. Please post back with the reply
if you get one and I will use it to update my web page.
I posted the information as a service to users of OEM software what
they could expect if they swap motherboards and have to make a phone
call activation. They might just rethink their upgrade purchases.
I am not trying to be difficult, but I posted the source of the
article not as a disclaimer but as a qualifier. The "as is" means
this is exactly from where I obtained the information. If I wanted
to distance myself, I would not have published the web page at all.

--
Michael Stevens MS-MVP XP
(e-mail address removed)
http://michaelstevenstech.com

JJ,
The link on my web site is directly from the Microsoft OEM system
builders newsgroups, and according to replies from The Microsoft
OEM System Builder Licensing Team.
This does seem to define the terms of the EULA. The notes are my
own.
http://michaelstevenstech.com/oemeula.htm
--
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



After a quick review, Heres whats new, you change all hardware
with
windows
xp oem , except, the circuit board (mobo), if you change this,
you
have to
get a new license in order to activate( exception using the same
board-defective replacement, maybe or maybe not), MS has said
also
that may
change this oem license exception " in the future ", what will
get
them to
change this ? if enough winxp oem cd owners , request Microsoft
change this,
this will do it and allow migration of winxp to newer differnet
circuit
boards ( made for xp that is) Feel free to comment on this MS
has
several
places where customers may request new features, ect, so they
are
listening.
Rho_1r [VIP] ,,,lol

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Michael;
Who is the OEM?
My understanding is if OEM Windows is legitimately bought with a piece
of hardware instead of a computer, there is no OEM.
The seller is not the OEM since they did not sell a computer.
The buyer is not an OEM since they are not recognized by Microsoft as
an OEM.

Since the original intention of OEM was to go with a complete system,
those that buy OEM Windows another way are in an orphan group by
themselves.
This is what they paid for when they chose the route they took and
saved $.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/

Michael;
I seems you just asked in that newsgroup.
The response could be interesting.

JJ,
See updated link with reply to my query. Also check out the links
listed in the reply for more confirmation of my original information
on my XP OEM Clarification web page. I don't adhere to Kurt's
philosophy, but I could not see any reason for him posting false
information from an official MS source.
The "The Microsoft OEM System Builder Licensing Team" stated
reasoning for ending the life of an OEM license was support
related. The OEM is responsible for the support and it would not be
reasonable they would be required to support a system with a new
motherboard and CPU. But that brings up more questions on who is
the OEM when purchased with hardware.
I am only the messenger, so don't shoot me.

OEMEULA clarification.
http://michaelstevenstech.com/oemeula.htm
--
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

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
The reference on your site is hearsay at best since there is no
authoritative source cited.
You even state "The above post was copied from a post from
kurttrail
posted to the msnews.microsoft.com newsgroups and is supplied as
is."
Since you state "as is" it seems you are distancing yourself from
the
information Kurt provided.
It seems more like it is Kurt's interpretation and even you are
not
convinced much since you say "as is".

The reference from there "Not convinced" says nothing
specifically
about the motherboard.
I looked through the Microsoft site again and did not see
anything
specifically stating the motherboard was the determining factor.
Of course there were many pages and I could have missed it.



I am convinced, and it is not hearsay. I don't always agree with
Kurt, but what reason would he have to post a false reply from The
Microsoft OEM System Builder Licensing Team? I can't think of a
reason myself since he is such a stickler for accuracy.
If you can access this link,
http://communities.microsoft.com/ne...newsgroup=microsoft.communities.oem.licensing
try asking the Microsoft OEM System Builder Licensing Team [ I
would
consider this an authoritative source ] what their policy as it
pertains to OEM XP and MB changes. Please post back with the reply
if you get one and I will use it to update my web page.
I posted the information as a service to users of OEM software
what
they could expect if they swap motherboards and have to make a
phone
call activation. They might just rethink their upgrade purchases.
I am not trying to be difficult, but I posted the source of the
article not as a disclaimer but as a qualifier. The "as is" means
this is exactly from where I obtained the information. If I wanted
to distance myself, I would not have published the web page at
all.

--
Michael Stevens MS-MVP XP
(e-mail address removed)
http://michaelstevenstech.com


JJ,
The link on my web site is directly from the Microsoft OEM
system
builders newsgroups, and according to replies from The Microsoft
OEM System Builder Licensing Team.
This does seem to define the terms of the EULA. The notes are my
own.
http://michaelstevenstech.com/oemeula.htm
--
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



After a quick review, Heres whats new, you change all hardware
with
windows
xp oem , except, the circuit board (mobo), if you change this,
you
have to
get a new license in order to activate( exception using the
same
board-defective replacement, maybe or maybe not), MS has said
also
that may
change this oem license exception " in the future ", what will
get
them to
change this ? if enough winxp oem cd owners , request
Microsoft
change this,
this will do it and allow migration of winxp to newer
differnet
circuit
boards ( made for xp that is) Feel free to comment on this MS
has
several
places where customers may request new features, ect, so they
are
listening.
Rho_1r [VIP] ,,,lol

 

[Michael Stevens]

Michael;
Who is the OEM?
My understanding is if OEM Windows is legitimately bought with a piece
of hardware instead of a computer, there is no OEM.
The seller is not the OEM since they did not sell a computer.
The buyer is not an OEM since they are not recognized by Microsoft as
an OEM.

Since the original intention of OEM was to go with a complete system,
those that buy OEM Windows another way are in an orphan group by
themselves.
This is what they paid for when they chose the route they took and
saved $.

LOL, I am not sure who the OEM is when purchased with hardware, but the
replacement of the MB with a different from original or upgraded MB would
need a new license from the stand point of MS legal.
I assume you are satisfied the information is not hearsay and is from
Microsoft Legal. If you check the links listed, it further qualifies the
information.
--
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

Michael;
I seems you just asked in that newsgroup.
The response could be interesting.

JJ,
See updated link with reply to my query. Also check out the links
listed in the reply for more confirmation of my original information
on my XP OEM Clarification web page. I don't adhere to Kurt's
philosophy, but I could not see any reason for him posting false
information from an official MS source.
The "The Microsoft OEM System Builder Licensing Team" stated
reasoning for ending the life of an OEM license was support
related. The OEM is responsible for the support and it would not be
reasonable they would be required to support a system with a new
motherboard and CPU. But that brings up more questions on who is
the OEM when purchased with hardware.
I am only the messenger, so don't shoot me.

OEMEULA clarification.
http://michaelstevenstech.com/oemeula.htm
--
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

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
The reference on your site is hearsay at best since there is no
authoritative source cited.
You even state "The above post was copied from a post from
kurttrail
posted to the msnews.microsoft.com newsgroups and is supplied as
is."
Since you state "as is" it seems you are distancing yourself from
the
information Kurt provided.
It seems more like it is Kurt's interpretation and even you are
not
convinced much since you say "as is".

The reference from there "Not convinced" says nothing
specifically
about the motherboard.
I looked through the Microsoft site again and did not see
anything
specifically stating the motherboard was the determining factor.
Of course there were many pages and I could have missed it.



I am convinced, and it is not hearsay. I don't always agree with
Kurt, but what reason would he have to post a false reply from The
Microsoft OEM System Builder Licensing Team? I can't think of a
reason myself since he is such a stickler for accuracy.
If you can access this link,
http://communities.microsoft.com/ne...newsgroup=microsoft.communities.oem.licensing
try asking the Microsoft OEM System Builder Licensing Team [ I
would
consider this an authoritative source ] what their policy as it
pertains to OEM XP and MB changes. Please post back with the reply
if you get one and I will use it to update my web page.
I posted the information as a service to users of OEM software
what
they could expect if they swap motherboards and have to make a
phone
call activation. They might just rethink their upgrade purchases.
I am not trying to be difficult, but I posted the source of the
article not as a disclaimer but as a qualifier. The "as is" means
this is exactly from where I obtained the information. If I wanted
to distance myself, I would not have published the web page at
all.

--
Michael Stevens MS-MVP XP
(e-mail address removed)
http://michaelstevenstech.com


JJ,
The link on my web site is directly from the Microsoft OEM
system
builders newsgroups, and according to replies from The Microsoft
OEM System Builder Licensing Team.
This does seem to define the terms of the EULA. The notes are my
own.
http://michaelstevenstech.com/oemeula.htm
--
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



After a quick review, Heres whats new, you change all hardware
with
windows
xp oem , except, the circuit board (mobo), if you change this,
you
have to
get a new license in order to activate( exception using the
same
board-defective replacement, maybe or maybe not), MS has said
also
that may
change this oem license exception " in the future ", what will
get
them to
change this ? if enough winxp oem cd owners , request
Microsoft
change this,
this will do it and allow migration of winxp to newer
differnet
circuit
boards ( made for xp that is) Feel free to comment on this MS
has
several
places where customers may request new features, ect, so they
are
listening.
Rho_1r [VIP] ,,,lol

 

[Alex Nichol]

Michael;
Who is the OEM?
My understanding is if OEM Windows is legitimately bought with a piece
of hardware instead of a computer, there is no OEM.
The seller is not the OEM since they did not sell a computer.
The buyer is not an OEM since they are not recognized by Microsoft as
an OEM.

I regard the EULA as a suspect document, as in some respects the only
logical reading I can make conflicts with the interpretation Microsoft
reps put on it. And I agree that their interpretation makes for a less
bad state of things for the user than the logical one does.

But that said, to quote
"("EULA") is a legal agreement between you
(either an individual or a single legal entity) and the
manufacturer ("Manufacturer") of the computer system or computer
system component ("HARDWARE") with which you acquired the
Microsoft software product(s) identified above ("SOFTWARE")"

So what it *says* is that if you bought the system with say a mouse, the
agreement is with the manufacturer of the mouse. which might be
Microsoft (different hat) or Logitech? Either way it does not make
sense. I have raised the need for a revision of EULAs to say clearly
what is meant with Microsoft at a very high level; but don't expect
changes in the short term, relating to XP

 

[Opinicus]

I regard the EULA as a suspect document, as in some
respects the only
logical reading I can make conflicts with the
interpretation Microsoft
reps put on it.

None of the interpretations that MS "reps" give are
enforceable. The EULA is.

But that said, to quote
"("EULA") is a legal agreement between you
(either an individual or a single legal entity) and the
manufacturer ("Manufacturer") of the computer system or
computer
system component ("HARDWARE") with which you acquired the
Microsoft software product(s) identified above
("SOFTWARE")"
So what it *says* is that if you bought the system with
say a mouse, the
agreement is with the manufacturer of the mouse. which
might be
Microsoft (different hat) or Logitech? Either way it does
not make
sense.

This gets better and better. My wife's XP OEM license
(including CD of course) was bought along with:

1 hard drive
1 floppy drive
2 DVD drives
1 optical mouse
1 keyboard
1 speaker system
1 sound+video card
1 power supply
1 monitor
1 mother board
512 megs ram
1 ups
1 power strip
1 power cord

I think that about does it. What a lot of "manufacturers"
this machine has.

 

[Alex Nichol]

This gets better and better. My wife's XP OEM license
(including CD of course) was bought along with:

1 hard drive
1 floppy drive
2 DVD drives
1 optical mouse
1 keyboard
1 speaker system
1 sound+video card
1 power supply
1 monitor
1 mother board
512 megs ram
1 ups
1 power strip
1 power cord

I think that about does it. What a lot of "manufacturers"
this machine has.

A very reasonable interpretation of that is that the hardware purchase
is the entire machine as assembled by the provider, who is the OEM in
the normal sense that all (?) understand

The trouble BTW that arises in the literal interpretation of the EULA,
is that if you buy a copy of the system with say a hard disk (to be
nearer the original thinking), then you can transfer the system together
with that disk, to a machine that is otherwise entirely different. BUT
should the disk die, and have to be replaced, so does the license. I
think having to buy a new copy of the software in those circumstances
would be even worse; but you can't have it both ways. Frankly the EULA
is sloppily worded (in other ways too) and needs careful redrafting to
convey clearly what is intended, having thought through those
intentions. And I have said so to a high level. But I am not holding
my breath