Using my Windows XP cd on my other PC?

[GonzoDaGr8]

Ok, Back to the original topic a little here...After thinking about it for a bit and even if it were legal for him to use the WinXP on his desktop instead of the lappy, Since it is a Compaq(ack)-made version of WinXP, there is no guarantee that it would even work on his desktop box..

And another..Now before this gets into a complete Microsoft-bashing rally:Q ..If you look at Apples' OS EULA and IBMs' EULA (for OS/2 no less:disgust: ), While not exactly worded the same, they still say the same thing. 1 OS, 1 machine, non-transferable, yada, yada, yada.. No, this is not my Pro-Microsoft side speaking up, just saying that it not just Microsoft that has strict EULAs', they just seem to get beaten up the most in this topic and nobody ever seems to bitch about Apples', Adobes', IBMs', Sierras', etc, etc, EULAs'.

 

[mithrandir2001]

Originally posted by: IamDavid
Just use the crack.. Its BS you can't use the OS you paid for..

** I'm not saying he should pirate any software or anything, he should just be able to use what is his. **

I have to agree. As long as you use the OS on only one machine, what's the harm? Laws, laws, laws. Yeah, yeah. Like we all obey the speed limits.

They are lofty ideals but we must cut corners occasionally to make things pragmatic. If you put the OS on another machine - while removing it completely from the original - you might break the letter of the EULA, but the spirit of 1 copy for only 1 machine is still maintained.

It's like the DVD CSS hack for Linux. You break the law when you crack the CSS but why should consumers be held hostages to silly lawyer-created laws? If you follow the spirit of the laws - playing DVDs on Linux boxes is hardly illegal in spirit - I think you are in the moral right.

DeCSS, XP hack...these were created to level the playing field so that the consumer isn't completely taken for a ride.

 

[bsobel]

** I'm not saying he should pirate any software or anything, he should just be able to use what is his. **

I didn't see this point made in the thread, and I think it might need to be. The thing being overlooked is that unlike a retail vs of XP (which he certainly has the right to transfer to another machine), he paid for this copy of xp at a discount as part of the hardware purchase. In exchange for the discounted price, he doesn't have the ability to transfer it to another machine.

Of course, if he was aware he made that 'trade-off' when purchasing is another issue, but that was the deal struck with the devil at the time.

Bill

 

[chemwiz]

This is getting to be a bit longer than I expected it to be. I've noticed nobody has shown that he doesn't have the LEGAL RIGHT to put that OS on any machine he wants to. Lots of "well, it's OEM..." or "the DMCA would disagree" but not one fact yet. The terms in the EULA aren't binding because he has that right, he PAID for a license for that software. Here's a little food for thought, for all you people who believe you're bound by whatever ridiculous terms are in a EULA: (lmao, this is a REAL link, too!)

"If a PC shipped with Windows preinstalled, can you remove the OS and install Linux instead? Well, no, according to Microsoft. A somewhat obscure Microsoft site aimed at helping schools deal with donated computers flatly states: "It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine."

So is he doing the wrong thing by removing it?

And for anyone who thinks the DMCA isn't the scariest damn piece of legislation, you should check out what it's really about. Total control of your computer, but not by you! They actually want to make it a crime to change the date or clock on your computer. Educate yourself a bit

I sent an email to the SPA (SIIA now) asking if was legal or not to do, so possibly we'll have a true answer. (Anti-piracy)

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: GonzoDaGr8
Ok, Back to the original topic a little here...After thinking about it for a bit and even if it were legal for him to use the WinXP on his desktop instead of the lappy, Since it is a Compaq(ack)-made version of WinXP, there is no guarantee that it would even work on his desktop box..

And another..Now before this gets into a complete Microsoft-bashing rally:Q ..If you look at Apples' OS EULA and IBMs' EULA (for OS/2 no less:disgust: ), While not exactly worded the same, they still say the same thing. 1 OS, 1 machine, non-transferable, yada, yada, yada.. No, this is not my Pro-Microsoft side speaking up, just saying that it not just Microsoft that has strict EULAs', they just seem to get beaten up the most in this topic and nobody ever seems to bitch about Apples', Adobes', IBMs', Sierras', etc, etc, EULAs'.

To defend apple a bit, they have not instituted WPA or anything similar. They have also created a 5 machine license for roughly $80 more than a 1 computer license for home users.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: mithrandir2001

Originally posted by: IamDavid
Just use the crack.. Its BS you can't use the OS you paid for..

** I'm not saying he should pirate any software or anything, he should just be able to use what is his. **

I have to agree. As long as you use the OS on only one machine, what's the harm? Laws, laws, laws. Yeah, yeah. Like we all obey the speed limits.

They are lofty ideals but we must cut corners occasionally to make things pragmatic. If you put the OS on another machine - while removing it completely from the original - you might break the letter of the EULA, but the spirit of 1 copy for only 1 machine is still maintained.

It's like the DVD CSS hack for Linux. You break the law when you crack the CSS but why should consumers be held hostages to silly lawyer-created laws? If you follow the spirit of the laws - playing DVDs on Linux boxes is hardly illegal in spirit - I think you are in the moral right.

DeCSS, XP hack...these were created to level the playing field so that the consumer isn't completely taken for a ride.

I do not belive it is our decision or right to do some of these things. The hacks are neat, and they shouldnt stop. But that does not mean they should be used. I feel the same way about proof of concept exploits being used in malicious ways.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: chemwiz
This is getting to be a bit longer than I expected it to be. I've noticed nobody has shown that he doesn't have the LEGAL RIGHT to put that OS on any machine he wants to. Lots of "well, it's OEM..." or "the DMCA would disagree" but not one fact yet. The terms in the EULA aren't binding because he has that right, he PAID for a license for that software. Here's a little food for thought, for all you people who believe you're bound by whatever ridiculous terms are in a EULA: (lmao, this is a REAL link, too!)

"If a PC shipped with Windows preinstalled, can you remove the OS and install Linux instead? Well, no, according to Microsoft. A somewhat obscure Microsoft site aimed at helping schools deal with donated computers flatly states: "It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine."

So is he doing the wrong thing by removing it?

Is this part of some license for the hardware or the software? If I got a new x86 based machine in the near future that I did not put together on my own I would not accept the license so I would not have any problems with that.

And for anyone who thinks the DMCA isn't the scariest damn piece of legislation, you should check out what it's really about. Total control of your computer, but not by you! They actually want to make it a crime to change the date or clock on your computer. Educate yourself a bit

I sent an email to the SPA (SIIA now) asking if was legal or not to do, so possibly we'll have a true answer. (Anti-piracy)

The DMCA is our own fault. Idiots thought it would be great to vote for lawyers and other shady characters thinking they would have the people's best interrests in mind. Idiots thought that there is no use in voting. Its the fault of the idiots we have politicians pandering to big business instead of doing what is right.

 

[GonzoDaGr8]

To defend apple a bit, they have not instituted WPA or anything similar.

Not yet anyway, and I bet they wouldn't ever do so as it is not possible to buy a new Mac sans OS. But..If thier market share goes up and more people get jazed on OSX, You could start to see more people buying OS-less macs on eBay and such and installing pirated copies of OSX. Next thing you know..OSX Activation. Yes, I know that is a bit of a stretch, but my mind is off on a tangent right now



They have also created a 5 machine license for roughly $80 more than a 1 computer license for home users.

Yeah, I saw that...That is the shiznit. Wish some other company we know (cough-Microsoft-cough) would do that. Sure would cut down on threads like this

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: GonzoDaGr8
To defend apple a bit, they have not instituted WPA or anything similar.

Not yet anyway, and I bet they wouldn't ever do so as it is not possible to buy a new Mac sans OS.

You can build your own actuallly

But..If thier market share goes up and more people get jazed on OSX, You could start to see more people buying OS-less macs on eBay and such and installing pirated copies of OSX. Next thing you know..OSX Activation. Yes, I know that is a bit of a stretch, but my mind is off on a tangent right now

Apple is a hardware company. They sell hardware. The OS is practically bonus. They have spoken out against both this and DRM. Maybe if Steve died or somethiing, but I dont see it happening before then.

They have also created a 5 machine license for roughly $80 more than a 1 computer license for home users.

Yeah, I saw that...That is the shiznit. Wish some other company we know (cough-Microsoft-cough) would do that. Sure would cut down on threads like this

I agree.

 

[sak]

n0cmonkey dont u ever sleep...? let it go man...let it go..