Installing Windows XP on two computers

[dderolph]

I think you need to read this: http://www.bsa.org/usa/antipiracy/. I became aware of BSA (Business Software Alliance) about four or five years ago when I was working for a small business and purchased Office 97 for them on eBay. A few weeks after installing it on one of the computers in the office, and registering it, I received a phone call from someone from Microsoft. They informed me someone else had registered the Office 97 that I had purchased on eBay. I presume they had verified that the other registration was an active installation of Office 97 on a computer being used by someone else. They explained that our copy of Office 97 was not legitimate. In other words, I had received an illegitimate copy of the software when I made the purchase on eBay.

During that phone conversation, they told about BSA; it's a no-nonsense organization that has significant power which it uses to aid numerous software makers (Microsoft, Adobe, and many others). They may even make unannounced visits to businesses who have been reported to be engaging in illegal use of software.

They also work in the International arena to stop the selling of illegal copies of software across international borders. Their website provides a means for anyone to report suspected software piracy. I've used it a few times to report email (spam) offering prices so low on software that it's obviously not legitimate. For example, Win XP Pro (full version) for, say, $50.

Not only are illegitmate copies/reproductions of software illegal, so is installing software on more than one computer when the EULA states the software is to be installed on one computer. Read the license agreement with Win XP. Unless you have a corporate license, you'll see that it states it is to be installed on *one* computer. Installing it on more than one violates the license agreement, is illegal, and could get you into legal trouble.

 

[bersl2]

Originally posted by: dderolph
I think you need to read this: http://www.bsa.org/usa/antipiracy/. I became aware of BSA (Business Software Alliance) about four or five years ago when I was working for a small business and purchased Office 97 for them on eBay. A few weeks after installing it on one of the computers in the office, and registering it, I received a phone call from someone from Microsoft. They informed me someone else had registered the Office 97 that I had purchased on eBay. I presume they had verified that the other registration was an active installation of Office 97 on a computer being used by someone else. They explained that our copy of Office 97 was not legitimate. In other words, I had received an illegitimate copy of the software when I made the purchase on eBay.

During that phone conversation, they told about BSA; it's a no-nonsense organization that has significant power which it uses to aid numerous software makers (Microsoft, Adobe, and many others). They may even make unannounced visits to businesses who have been reported to be engaging in illegal use of software.

They also work in the International arena to stop the selling of illegal copies of software across international borders. Their website provides a means for anyone to report suspected software piracy. I've used it a few times to report email (spam) offering prices so low on software that it's obviously not legitimate. For example, Win XP Pro (full version) for, say, $50.

Not only are illegitmate copies/reproductions of software illegal, so is installing software on more than one computer when the EULA states the software is to be installed on one computer. Read the license agreement with Win XP. Unless you have a corporate license, you'll see that it states it is to be installed on *one* computer. Installing it on more than one violates the license agreement, is illegal, and could get you into legal trouble.

The BSA is basically a quasi-governmental enforcement agency. I've heard about them literally conducting raids on businesses.

Oh, and I love their ads:
Speak Up or Pack Up!
Does Your Company Have You Take Unnecessary Risks?

And what discussion about the BSA would be complete without every kid's favorite, the BSA anti-piracy weasel^H^H^H^H^H^Hferret!

 

[Phoenix86]

Originally posted by: bersl2
The BSA is basically a quasi-governmental enforcement agency. I've heard about them literally conducting raids on businesses.

This is true. The company I work for was "visited" by them a couple of years before I got here. They were *ahem* less than compliant and paid some heafty fines+licensing fees.

 

[imported_Collector]

Originally posted by bersl2
The BSA is basically a quasi-governmental enforcement agency. I've heard about them literally conducting raids on businesses.

How do they do this? Do they show up with search warrants and law-enforcement personnel?

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: Collector

Originally posted by bersl2
The BSA is basically a quasi-governmental enforcement agency. I've heard about them literally conducting raids on businesses.

How do they do this? Do they show up with search warrants and law-enforcement personnel?

They better have search warrants or they will be in violation of rights/laws... most likely law enforcement is involved as well.

 

[TGS]

Originally posted by: tuzz
What happens if I install my legit copy of Windows XP on a 2nd computer, using the same CD-key? Apart from my own morality going down the tube does anything happen to XP itself? I don't want to install it on my brother's computer then find out XP has funkified itself on my computer.

And all that stuff about activation. I've formatted and reinstalled XP a few times now and I don't recall ever having to call Microsoft to get my XP activated.

You ever had Bill Gates smashing through your window, have his goons turn you upside down and shake you for money. Then Billy goes to your bathroom and takes a giant dump on the front of your toilet. Not to mention kicking your cats litter box over before he leaves.


You will...

 

[Tom]

just an aside--

EULAs are written by companies; and technically THE LAW is not written by companies. Don't confuse a EULA with THE LAW.

A EULA isn't binding if it isn't legally enforcable.

 

[Thorny]

If I download a pirated program from the internet, decide it sux and delete it, is that stealing?

If I download a program, decide I like it and purchase a copy, is that stealing?

If I buy a cd, rip it and put it in my ipod and don't destroy the original cd, is that stealing?


The way I look at it is this. If my action takes nothing away from someone else, I don't feel bad about it. If I try something and like it, I WILL pay for my use of it. But if it's something that I dislike, I'm not going pay for it. The day they allow you to return open software or open music is the day I will pay for it upfront. I will NEVER pay for music again without listening to it first, period. Too many I have bought a cd, and wish I could have my money back because it sucked. Same goes for software.

If microsoft wants to chase me down for installing my copy of xp on two computers in my home, they can. I don't think Bill minds to tell you the truth. He knows I would NEVER have paid for the second copy anyway, so what is he out? Nothing. MS lost $0 by my actions. It's not like I'm selling my product key to people trying to make money on someone elses dime. I just don't think I should have to pay twice for something I already own and can only use one at a time anyway.

 

[Phoenix86]

The way I look at it is this. If my action takes nothing away from someone else, I don't feel bad about it. If I try something and like it, I WILL pay for my use of it. But if it's something that I dislike, I'm not going pay for it.

Too bad the law doesn't agree.

Do you also taste the fruit before you buy it? Don't know how fresh it is and all before you "open the package"? What about beef? Do you steal some cuts, cook them, see if they are tender enough, then pay?

You can justify it however you way, it's wrong.

 

[Thorny]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86

The way I look at it is this. If my action takes nothing away from someone else, I don't feel bad about it. If I try something and like it, I WILL pay for my use of it. But if it's something that I dislike, I'm not going pay for it.

Too bad the law doesn't agree.

Do you also taste the fruit before you buy it? Don't know how fresh it is and all before you "open the package"? What about beef? Do you steal some cuts, cook them, see if they are tender enough, then pay?

You can justify it however you way, it's wrong.

If I get bad fuit, beef ect I can return them for a refund. If I get a rotten peach I guarantee wal-mart will give me back my money. Try that with software and see what happens. I stated that if it wasn't for BS return policies on software/music I would pay first. Fruit or meat isn't a valid comparison anyway, since your physically taking something that the vendor would of sold for a profit.



Also, just because the law backs something doesn't mean its ok in my book. The law says abortion is legal, but IMO is wrong as hell. And I don't currently see the law cracking down on end users like me anytime soon. Can you show me one case of a non-profit seeking end user being sued for breaching an EULA?