Windows 7 for System Builders oem question...

[nOOky]

Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit 1-Pack for System Builders - OEM, can I change all the hardware on the pc it was installed on? Would it simply require a call to Microsoft for a new key?

 

[Nothinman]

It's a violation of the licensing agreement if you change the motherboard for any reason other than damage replacement, but MS will probably reactivate it for you regardless.

 

[nOOky]

I guess I damaged it then, and decided to replace it with something more current.

 

[Nothinman]

However you need to justify the license violation to yourself...

 

[nOOky]

I'll live knowing I paid $99 for a legitimate license and I'm using it on the same pc. Same as I don't lay awake because I drove home at 60 mph in a 55. They got their money from me, at least I didn't buy an upgrade copy and do a clean install with it ; )

 

[VirtualLarry]

I'll live knowing I paid $99 for a legitimate license and I'm using it on the same pc. Same as I don't lay awake because I drove home at 60 mph in a 55. They got their money from me, at least I didn't buy an upgrade copy and do a clean install with it ; )

But then it would be within the license agreement to move it to another machine.

 

[nOOky]

If you must know. I decided to upgrade the pc I have it installed on. I am putting the old components in my second system. My gf primarily uses the second system. She is ordering a copy of the same OS for when I get time to redo that system. I told her as a nicety of me upgrading the computer for her, she could foot the bill for the OS. She hasn't ordered it yet, and I naturally want to get my new stuff up and running when it hits the door Friday. So I will use the same copy of the OS since it's the only one I have right now, and install another copy on the hardware the original copy used to be on. In fact I will switching copies of the OS for the same system, because I am impatient.
Technically it might violate the License agreement, but it's not pirated or otherwise so I feel okay with it. I didn't cause them to lose money or cheat them in any way that I can see, so I think they'll be okay with it.

 

[Nothinman]

Technically it might violate the License agreement, but it's not pirated or otherwise so I feel okay with it. I didn't cause them to lose money or cheat them in any way that I can see, so I think they'll be okay with it.

Actually you did, the OEM licenses are so much cheaper because of the additional restrictions placed on them and you're ignoring those restrictions.

Depending on the timeframe in which she'll be buying a license, why not just install yours with no key and wait? You don't have to activate the install right away.

 

[Diogenes2]

What is an example of restrictions on OEM that result in less cost to Microsoft ?

 

[Nothinman]

What is an example of restrictions on OEM that result in less cost to Microsoft ?

The primary one being support, OEM licenses come with none because the OEM is supposed to support whomever they sell the PC with that license to. But that's beside the point, you got a cheaper license from MS because of certain points in that license. Ignoring those points because they're inconvenient to you is at best a dick move, even if it is towards a faceless corporation.

 

[nOOky]

I'll probably just wait to activate it, since I have 30 days.
I don't really care for your comment though, and I don't feel it's very cool. Adults can get their point across without resorting to name calling, even if it's worded in an indirect manner.
Thanks for your advice though, and have an enjoyable day.

 

[Nothinman]

I'll probably just wait to activate it, since I have 30 days.
I don't really care for your comment though, and I don't feel it's very cool. Adults can get their point across without resorting to name calling, even if it's worded in an indirect manner.
Thanks for your advice though, and have an enjoyable day.

I prefer to be direct, it's all just semantics anyway. I think someone who is going to pay for a license under one set of rules and then disregard those rules because it's inconvenient for them is a dick, that's all there is to it. There was no name calling; you're not doing that, so it doesn't apply to you.

 

[Diogenes2]

The primary one being support, OEM licenses come with none because the OEM is supposed to support whomever they sell the PC with that license to. But that's beside the point, you got a cheaper license from MS because of certain points in that license. Ignoring those points because they're inconvenient to you is at best a dick move, even if it is towards a faceless corporation.

If it's beside the point, why bring it up?


If it's cheaper because they don't provide support, and you don't use the support, then what is the problem?

Are retailers being unethical because they sell thousands of copies of OEM packages that include a SATA cable or some such ?


Do you think Microsoft is unaware of this ?

 

[Nothinman]

If it's beside the point, why bring it up?

You asked for an example, so I gave the best one I could think of. Reiterating that you're not allowed to move it to another PC seems redundant.

If it's cheaper because they don't provide support, and you don't use the support, then what is the problem?

Nothing, but not calling support isn't what this thread is about; the OP wasn't looking to get around the lack of support. If he was trying to find a back door number or something to call support would you have a different opinion about that?

Are retailers being unethical because they sell thousands of copies of OEM packages that include a SATA cable or some such ?

Do you think Microsoft is unaware of this ?

Yes, I think those retailers are being unethical by exploiting a potential loophole in the agreement, but obviously that loophole is enough that either MS doesn't think they can win a legal battle about it or they don't care. But if they don't care, they should fix their licenses to remove the ambiguity.

 

[aloser]

Are retailers being unethical because they sell thousands of copies of OEM packages that include a SATA cable or some such ?


Do you think Microsoft is unaware of this ?

Yes, I think those retailers are being unethical by exploiting a potential loophole in the agreement, but obviously that loophole is enough that either MS doesn't think they can win a legal battle about it or they don't care. But if they don't care, they should fix their licenses to remove the ambiguity.

Unless I'm missing something, how is that "unethical" - they're obliging by the terms of the license. OEM software is, per Microsoft's licensing agreement, only to be sold with a piece of non-peripheral hardware, which is why you aren't (supposed to be) able to buy just the disc.

 

[Nothinman]

Unless I'm missing something, how is that "unethical" - they're obliging by the terms of the license. OEM software is, per Microsoft's licensing agreement, only to be sold with a piece of non-peripheral hardware, which is why you aren't (supposed to be) able to buy just the disc.

Because the license says it's tied to the motherboard, so why should they be able to sell it with a SATA cable?

Pretty much all licensing coming out of MS is a mess and needs to be cleaned up; they don't even fully understand it.

 

[JackMDS]

@aloser

Yeah, Unfortunately it is all a legal mess.

The OEM seller is bound by the seller-buyer contract (he is not using the OS he is just selling it).

The User is bound by the EULA.

If the seller is aware of what the user is doing, or going to do, then it is an "unethical" behavior.

Whether the seller action is legal or not is another story.


😎

 

[aloser]

I completely agree in that regard - I, too, am baffled at how "the license is tied to the mobo; so why isn't the disc only sold with a mobo" - but calling it outright "unethical" is a bit of a misnomer, hence my confusion is all. 🙂

(My personal guess is it's set up as "any hardware" simply because not everyone buying a motherboard needs Windows, and not everyone buying Windows needs a motherboard. The vast majority, yes - but not everyone.)

 

[nOOky]

Sorry for the revival... I ordered a second copy of Win 7 in case my cd key was invalid after I made major upgrades, so I finally got it and got back to activating my first copy. Anyway my fears were unfounded, I simply clicked activate and after a few seconds it told me I had successfully activated my Windows. I was using the same hard drive, but different cpu and mobo etc.
I'll use the second copy to install on system 2, so it wasn't a waste. Also I did not have to buy any hardware with either copy, that's weird.