David said:I had 3. One was a step grandmother.
That isn't the license.
That's dumbing it down. But you didn't answer the question.
Any one person only has two Grandmas, so how is it that you have more
exposure than me?
But Kony's term, "exposure," would imply, trillions of gamma rays from a
radioactive source. Not 2 or 3 old ladies.
Was there a box with your OEM?
There wasn't a box with mine. Mine didn't come with one, it just came with
this flimsy paper disk sleeve and flare sticker with the reactivation codes.
What does it matter if it is at time of purchase or time of first use when
you reread the EULA?
I think Kony wants box to say on box to some degree,
Requirements: Removes a portion of the American Bill of Rights, Voids Free
Commerce, Prohibits Individual Privacy, Intel compatible processor, 60M of
free space, and Internet connection.
Quite simply, you already PAID, and cannot then at the time
of reviewing the license, decline it without penalty as it
is a system w/license bundle. If it were a box from a
retail store, they typically have an "exchange-only after
opened" policy, which is solution as it's for same-item.
Terms of a contract must be disclosed, ie- available at the
time and point of entering into it so that it can be known
for certain which of several differing Windows EULAs applies
to that _specific_ license. If they waited till you
accepted the EULA to bill you for Windows that would be
another matter.
And quite simply, being an uninformed buyer (actually ignorant) does not
excuse the buyer of their responsibility for it.
They didn't have to
purchase a Windows bundles PC, but they agreed to it.
You still don't get it. The buyer is only ignorant because
of MS' neglecting to disclose terms. MS has hidden the
terms and should be forthcoming. You try to shift blame
when I already stated an obvious solution- a packaging that
discloses the terms.
kony said:And quite simply, being an uninformed buyer (actually ignorant) does
not excuse the buyer of their responsibility for it.
The buyer is being responsible in looking on the package for
the EULA.
You still don't get it. The buyer is only ignorant because
of MS' neglecting to disclose terms. MS has hidden the
terms and should be forthcoming. You try to shift blame
when I already stated an obvious solution- a packaging that
discloses the terms.
The buyer IS excused. If they weren't, then WHY does MS
still have that part where you read the EULA and click
"agree"? That in itself is evidence that the buyer is
excused because they were NOT agreeing to the EULA at the
point, time of purchase.
They didn't have to
purchase a Windows bundles PC, but they agreed to it.
No, you have no precedent, no reason to believe this is
true. You are essentially "pulling it out of your arse"
when you claim they have "agreed to it".
Make it a scientific study- go to stores and find people
buying windows. Don't try to taint the results by crafted
dialog, simply ask the purchaser what directly relates to
your statement and nothing more: "Did you already agree to
the EULA?".
To think that someone has agreed to [unknown terms they
can't review at time of fulfilling their end of the
agreement nor can be verified with certainty to apply to
that specific license] is ludicrous. You can claim it as
much as you want and it's still not true.
You are NEVER gonna convince Lameboy that the EULA is anything but God's
Laws. A burning bush gave the EULA to Billses on stone tablets.
Leythos said:I was not addressing it's validity, and my reply had nothing to do
with it.
He said people could not read the EULA before purchasing the product
or opening the box, which is not true - it's on-line and you can
request a copy if you call MS.
There is a difference between being in INFORMED customer and an
Ignorant one, the choice is up to the customer as the information IS
available without purchase.
Leythos said:MS Didn't hide anything, you can get all the information even before you
purchase the OS/System.
"David Candy" <.> said:Why would one go to a company that one has no relationship with. The OEM
issues the license not Microsoft. The EULA is between the user and the OEM
(not so on retail and upgrade - it's MS on those versions, but they a minute
portion of MS sales).
Also the sale takes place before the EULA screen shows.
aka@ said:Very true but most people, if asked what an EULA is will say, "What's that?"
and MS knows it, you know it and it's a scam just like the activation and
validation and whatever new hoop MS decides they want their paying customers
to jump through. Preying on the innocent who are ignorant of the EULA is a
bad thing and you supporting it makes you what?
Leythos said:Why don't you rant about all the other vendors that do the EXACT SAME
THING?
Leythos said:The licensing of the software, the requirement for it, is, when a
packaged machine is purchased from a place like CompUSA, Gateway,
etc... included in the manual that ships with the boxes. There is
also wording on the CD in many cases.
Again, you/they can choose to be ignorant or not.
--
Leythos said:Why don't you rant about all the other vendors that do the EXACT SAME
THING?
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.