Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (
More info?)
<ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
news:428c9014.5604015@nntp.charter.net...
> Having done the purchase of OEM licenses in the past, I can state what the
> general interpretation of the EULA has been. But since all EULAs are
> fluid and
> ever-changing, who knows what Micro$oft is doing now.
>
> Several years ago, at the bankruptcy auction of a small 3rd tier
> distributor, a
> bunch of copies of OEM Windows went on the block. The auctioneer had
> spoken
> with someone from Micro$oft, who told him that it was OK to sell each copy
> of
> Windows with a motherboard. So I ended up buying 100-odd working
> motherboards
> with OEM copies of Windows.
>
> My distributor sells OEM copies of Windows with a significant piece of
> hardware,
> either motherboard or hard drive.
>
> Selling an OEM copy of Windows with a Y cable is stretching it a bit.
Ben, apparently not stretching much. There may be vendors who're more
visible on the web than NewEgg, but I certainly don't know who they are. I
would think NewEgg consulted with MS about acceptable practices for sale of
OS media. I've also seen lesser vendors offering admittedly failed pieces
of hardware with each purchase to meet the requirement, and doing so openly
on ebay (which is certainly a reach, imo).
>
> Apparently retail copies of Windows do not have the same hardware
> restrictions
> on them, else you could not buy a copy of Window$ in the store.
>
> How does this relate to the leftovers from a Dell system that was
> scrapped? In
> strictest terms, the license goes with the motherboard or hard drive. But
> the
> Window$ COA is affixed to the chassis and pretty difficult to remove.
And that's my point and opinion. If the COA remains on the Dell (or other
OEM system), then imo, the right to have the OS indicated by said COA exists
from that mfr's media. The COA has been paid for in the price of the
system, either used or new.
When one begins to cross the COA (ie - installing XP on an OEM system with a
Win2k Pro COA, for example) on the box, then that, to me, is illegal unless
a retail license/key has been purchased by the system owner separately.
I believe that to be a good general practice - and if it isn't, I'd
appreciate someone pointing out how it is not. (seriously).
>
> In practical terms, the Windows COA could probably be used on any system
> with a
> Dell BIOS, and Micro$oft would have a helluva time declaring that it was
> illegal. I doubt that Dell is obliged to track COA info versus Dell
> serial
> numbers. The Windows COA from a Dell system could be used on a non-Dell
> system,
> but Micro$oft has aggressively tracked down dealers who traffic in COAs
> and
> prosecuted them.
The latter is crossing the line in a pretty obvious way, imo.
>
> As far as the Windows install media is concerned, Micro$oft raves screams
> and
> hollers about illegal copies of Windows install CDs, but many
> manufacturers give
> the system owner the ability to create a backup copy of the Windows
> install
> media (if the install CD is not delivered with the system, a growing
> trend) to
> be used in the event of a failed hard disk. So now the question is how
> does
> Micro$oft or any one else tell the difference between an alleged illegal
> copy of
> a Windows install CD and a copy created supposedly for backup purposes?
I don't suppose they can close that loophole, since a Dell-badged OS media
disc will install on another Dell machine w/o prompt for a key or
activation, I think.
>
> Micro$oft has learned well from the IBM it replaced as the 500 lb. gorilla
> of
> software: Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt with product authentication to
> somehow
> make sure that the installed software is legit.
>
> Maybe Linux IS a better answer. At least one does not feel like Big
> Brother is
> watching... Ben Myers
>
Linux will be a better answer when the new user sees it as such, and I don't
see that happening anytime soon.
Interesting discussion though.
Stew
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram