• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is it legal to use software on your own computer?

Z

Zedtom

Platinum Member
I went over to the off-lease computer outlet and bought a Pentium 133 HP Vectra for $25, just to mess around with. When I hooked it up, I discovered that they hadn't wiped the hard drive and reinstalled the OS. It had been used by a major military defense contractor- so I got kinda excited when I started looking at the document files. Anyway, I didn't find anything very interesting, so I just cleaned up a few things, made some changes to the registry, etc.
There are some really nice programs on the hard drive. Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator as well as some others.
I don't have a problem using these programs for my personal use. After all, I OWN this computer. I realize that these were sold and licensed to someone else- but here they are!
 
no, you can't "legaly" use the software since you don't own the license to them. Unless the computers comes with the COA paper for all the software, you don't own anything but the hardware.
 


<<
I don't have a problem using these programs for my personal use. After all, I OWN this computer. I realize that these were sold and licensed to someone else- but here they are! >>



Well it sounds like you are going to use them anyway, but from a strictly legal standpoint it isn't legal if it is licensed to someone else.
 
maybe.
sometimes the software is transferable, sometimes its not.
you'd have to check with each company.
but, in reality, dont worry about it, you wont get caught (unless i tell 😉 )
software companys go after the pirates that make bootleg software and corporations that install more copies than they paid for.
in general, they dont care about 1 person at home
 
Wait a second, if the original owner paid for the license, isn't it them who the law applies to? e.g. until they uninstall form the computer he bought, then they can't use the software anywhere else...
 
Hey b0mbrman...you got me thinking. I'm the victim here. If this guy at the defense contractor didn't remove the software from his machine before disposing of it, than he is the one running pirated software on his replacement machine. Maybe I should notify Adobe, so they can send their legal dept. goons out to explain the law. We wouldn't want a big corporation to think that they're above the law, would we?
 
You OWN that computer, but not a license for any software on it unless they gave specifically transferred the license to you. Whether the software company allows license transfers in their policy never even comes into play, the original seller never offered to transfer them.

Go ahead. I won't tell. 🙂

And that's why we have MS developing WPA...

oh ya right and you've never installed MS Office on more than one machine you have at home? LOL

Right, everyone who owns a computer has obviously commited some form of piracy...
 
What happened to MS policy of allowing software to be cross-installed on the assumption that when you are using it at home, the work system is idle?
 


<< What happened to MS policy of allowing software to be cross-installed on the assumption that when you are using it at home, the work system is idle? >>



What happened is greed.

It's the same reason that product activation was introduced.

In reality, software licensing theft in the U.S. is pretty low. If Microsoft really wanted to boost licensing revenue, it should figure out how to get license compliance to be achieved overseas.
 
What happened is greed.

It's the same reason that product activation was introduced.

Greed? You mean it's considered greedy to expect to get paid for your laber?
 
its not legal, but i doubt the police will come knocking at your door for using it.

but your best bet is to format, so you have legal things on your hdd.
 
I think this thread clearly illustrates how universally disrespected EULAs are and why otherwise honest people disrespect and ignore them.

In this case the software is not being plagerized. This software vendor sold a copy to the original owner of the computer. He is no longer using it. Is it being suggested that the right to use the software ends when the original buyer is done with it? B... S....!!!!!!!! The EULA may state this but no reasonable person is going to respect that.

It may be an esoteric legal concept that you are only buying the right to use software. However, it will be very hard to convince me that I don't own the box and its contents in my hand when I fork over $100.00+ and walk out of Comp-USA with it. Frankley, I will do what I think is morally proper (simply not either sell or give away copies). Beyond that, I, as I believe most people, could not care one iota what the EULA states. Maybe that is why the EULAs are never read.

My point is this. People universally and historically flaunt requirements that they do not consider reasonable. I think the EULAs clearly fall into this category. When the software vendors recognize they cannot fight gravity, then the EULAs will be read and respected.

 
It may be an esoteric legal concept that you are only buying the right to use software. However, it will be very hard to convince me that I don't own the box and its contents in my hand when I fork over $100.00+ and walk out of Comp-USA with it

If you walk out of CompUSA you do own the software because they sell you a license for the software in addition to the hardware, if you walk out of Joe's house he probably left it on there by mistake or knowingly giving you pirated software which is illegal for you to use in both cases.

And I think the fine you get when caught will be pretty convincing, if you still don't want to believe it.

When the software vendors recognize they cannot fight gravity

You mean with things like WPA?

I really dislike MS and their software, but I hope WPA is a huge, unbreakable hit because it'll teach people like you to respect the software licenses the author of the software chooses.
 


<< discovered that they hadn't wiped the hard drive and reinstalled the OS. It had been used by a major military defense contractor >>



How long will it be before some kind top secret/highly sensitive/scandalous material gets out this way? Design papers? Blueprints? Personal memos? IMHO, that's justing asking for trouble.

my $.02 anyway...
 
This thread fully reinforces the reason why I wipe my systems before I leave them! I *always* a *nix based OS before I stop using it at work (leaving employer), or donating it. Linux is great at putting an OS on the system and I definitely don't want someone snooping around the files I leave behind.

Linux is great at giving away!

vash
 


<< What happened is greed.

It's the same reason that product activation was introduced.

Greed? You mean it's considered greedy to expect to get paid for your laber? >>



You left out the most important line of my quote. It's greed when most of the American customers have already paid the M$ monopoly tax when buying a PC, and now are forced to accept draconian measures such as product activation.

It's overseas where licensing is often ignored. I get your point to be a license-abiding citizen or choose a free OS, but then if you've read a EULA, who would want to uphold one of those?
 


<< it'll teach people like you to respect the software licenses the author of the software chooses. >>



You are 100% correct Nothinman, I do not even begin to respect the EULAs. I cannot respect something that dictates unreasonable and/or unrealistic conditions. I do not plagerize software and I do not give copies away. Beyond that, I will do what I please with it in my own home. Regardless of all the self-righteous discussion, I also do not begin to understand what is morally incorrect with this approach. As long as I have to pay for the software with hard earned money, I will follow what is reasonable and moral. When it is given to me for free, I will respect any condition the donor imposes.

Furthermore it is ridiculous to expect a buyer to read the volumes of fine legalese in the EULA. Why would anyone want to waste their time reading a long boring document that has little or no meaning. Again, it gets back to what is reasonable and moral. I will not plagerize it so why do I need to read the EULA to understand this. Can you imagine similar EULAs with other creative products such as books? I see no difference.

You may not like this candidness but if you are willing to be honest with yourself I think you will find that an overwhelming number of people take this same approach. Plagerizing someone else's work to avoid buying it is indeed a problem. Reasonable personal use of a purchased product is certainly not a credible problem to anyone.
 
You left out the most important line of my quote. It's greed when most of the American customers have already paid the M$ monopoly tax when buying a PC, and now are forced to accept draconian measures such as product activation.

That's why when you get a PC with XP already installed it's preactivated (atleast the copy on my Inspiron was) and you get a restore CD, not a full install CD. It's sad but it really has come to the point where you can't trust the average consumer not to pirate software, it's almost to the point where buying software is strange because you can simply download a copy or get your friend to give you one.

You are 100% correct Nothinman, I do not even begin to respect the EULAs. I cannot respect something that dictates unreasonable and/or unrealistic conditions.

But instead of voicing your opinion about how bad the EULA is you simply ignore it and use the software anyway? I think a lot of laws are stupid, but I'm not allowed to ignore them.

As long as I have to pay for the software with hard earned money, I will follow what is reasonable and moral.

The software isn't yours to decide what is reasonable to do with it.

Can you imagine similar EULAs with other creative products such as books? I see no difference.

It's a lot simpler for me to dup a CD than it is a book, and there's lots of libraries one can borrow a book from for free, free computer and software borrowing is not, and probably never will be, a reality.

Reasonable personal use of a purchased product is certainly not a credible problem to anyone.

Again, it's not yours to decide what's reasonable.

If I rent a car and sign a deal that says I can only put 100 miles on it a week and I drive it 200 a week, I can't return it and say only 100 is unreasonable and not expect to be charged more. If you don't like the terms of the deal, don't agree to them, pretty simple if you ask me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top