Licence

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"old" devildog wrote:
> Going to do something I don't normally do, add an attachment. But I
> am doing so to show something.
>
> I scanned this right off of the back of the box. "post-sale
> shrink-wrap license" I think not. This is in plain sight on the back
> of the XP box. You are even told to check out the EULA before using.
> Unless yours came with a plain brown wrapper, it was easy to read.
>
> I am so tired of looking at the endless posts about who is right in
> this matter. Microsoft puts the warning in plain sight on the box. If
> you didn't see it, then get glasses, if you didn't read it then learn
> to read or have someone read it to you. If you decided to ignore it,
> then the words "dumb as a rock" comes to mind.
>
> Read the news, MS is cracking down on the unlicensed software out
> there. Look at what the recording industry is doing to the
> downloading of music. MS is right behind them. When you try an get an
> update from MS Updates and you fail the "test" do you think your ISP
> can't be noted, traced by court order, and a knock on your door by a
> processor server can't happen. Ask the people who kept swapping tunes
> on the internet. The court doesn't care who you are, all they care
> about is that you are now in court, going up against the biggest
> company in the world. The very company who wrote the software running
> on the judges desk right there in the court room. Bet you MS is soon
> for this path, and I bet it will come before the roll out of Vista.
> Are you willing to take the chance. By the way I have never failed
> the "test" to update or download any software from MS. The box tells
> it all. I purchased a full retail copy (not an OEM) of XP.
>

Sorry, but I don't open attachments from idiots I don't know.

I have certain rights as a human being. Privacy in my home, "fair use"
of the copyrighted material I buy. And MS thinks it can shrink-wrap
license away my rights, then they can sue me. But I won't be holding my
breath, since MS doesn't have the balls to do it.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Sorry, but I don't open attachments from idiots I don't know"
Well I don't know you either, but a simple jpg is right there. If you don't
want to look at the picture attached then you should look at the back of
your box that contained XP. If you don't have the box, then you received the
OS preinstalled with your PC (OEM). The agreement is right there on the
outside of the "recovery" CD(s) as well as the 'owners manual that came with
your PC. It was only to late for a refund if you installed the software. It
says "If you do not accept the terms of the License Agreement, you should
promptly return the product for a refund."

No refund after install is for the protection of the software company ( you
know what pirated software is don't you). Once you install it you now own
the "right" to use it. You don't own nor ever will, the software. You just
purchased the "right" to use it. Check your agreement, Microsoft retains
ownership of the software, you have only purchased the license to use it.
They may at any time remove your license, make you remove the software from
your computer, and remove from you any copies of the software.

I do expect Microsoft to take a stronger stance in dealing with "illegally"
obtained software. After all they have a staff of attorneys who make more in
a month than you will ever make in a lifetime. Microsoft can afford to stock
the very best in their legal department. Can you afford to fight them? I
sold software from many different companies over the years, but at every
time before selling the software to any client, I explained the agreement to
them in full before even closing the sale. Some of the software sold had to
have a renewal of the license every year, the cost of this was also
explained in full, as well as the results of not renewing the license, which
was the removal of the software and recovering of all the media used in the
install and operation of the software.

I think the reason you don't want to look, is because you don't want to know
you are wrong. Don't tell me you didn't know in advance before you installed
XP, tell it to a jury and a judge. Maybe they will belive you over the
attorney who is making 5+ million a year, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Because I am tired of this insane argument against Microsoft's EULA, I hope
that you find out the real truth soon. I think you need to contact an
attorney, and sit down and show him the EULA and your argument against it,
then hear it from someone who understands the law. I would say you are wrong
in your understanding of the license agrement, but you wouldn't listen
anyway. You are like my oldest son, he was never wrong. Even after he served
6 months in the county jail for underage DUI, the person who sold him the
beer was in the wrong, he was never wrong for drinking it or driving a car
after 3 six-packs. Excuses are like a**holes, everyones got one.

"old" devildog
Sgt. U.S.M.C.
--Semper Fi--
_________________________-

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:ucjUc3fuFHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| "old" devildog wrote:
| > Going to do something I don't normally do, add an attachment. But I
| > am doing so to show something.
| >
| > I scanned this right off of the back of the box. "post-sale
| > shrink-wrap license" I think not. This is in plain sight on the back
| > of the XP box. You are even told to check out the EULA before using.
| > Unless yours came with a plain brown wrapper, it was easy to read.
| >
| > I am so tired of looking at the endless posts about who is right in
| > this matter. Microsoft puts the warning in plain sight on the box. If
| > you didn't see it, then get glasses, if you didn't read it then learn
| > to read or have someone read it to you. If you decided to ignore it,
| > then the words "dumb as a rock" comes to mind.
| >
| > Read the news, MS is cracking down on the unlicensed software out
| > there. Look at what the recording industry is doing to the
| > downloading of music. MS is right behind them. When you try an get an
| > update from MS Updates and you fail the "test" do you think your ISP
| > can't be noted, traced by court order, and a knock on your door by a
| > processor server can't happen. Ask the people who kept swapping tunes
| > on the internet. The court doesn't care who you are, all they care
| > about is that you are now in court, going up against the biggest
| > company in the world. The very company who wrote the software running
| > on the judges desk right there in the court room. Bet you MS is soon
| > for this path, and I bet it will come before the roll out of Vista.
| > Are you willing to take the chance. By the way I have never failed
| > the "test" to update or download any software from MS. The box tells
| > it all. I purchased a full retail copy (not an OEM) of XP.
| >
|
| Sorry, but I don't open attachments from idiots I don't know.
|
| I have certain rights as a human being. Privacy in my home, "fair use"
| of the copyrighted material I buy. And MS thinks it can shrink-wrap
| license away my rights, then they can sue me. But I won't be holding my
| breath, since MS doesn't have the balls to do it.
|
| --
| Peace!
| Kurt
| Self-anointed Moderator
| microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
| http://microscum.com/mscommunity
| "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
| "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
|
|

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

CWatters wrote:
> "Mixxdj" <Mixxdj@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:09D80756-8687-4B11-9AA4-B542871E0947@microsoft.com...
>> First I live in Canada and the best price I can find is $125.00, I
>> can't understand why Microsoft Charges so much if they lowered the
>> price to 75 or 85 dollars most people would buy windows.
>
> Most people DO buy Windows.
>
>> There would be allot less illegal
>> copies of XP around and they would end up making more money in the
>> long run. Here I went out and bought XP and now I want to install it
>> on a second computer in my house and it's going to cost me another
>> $150. And Microsoft wonders why there are so many Pirate copies of
>> windows.
>
> Not so many since Activation was introduced.

LOL! Activation stopped nothing.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"old" devildog wrote:
> "Sorry, but I don't open attachments from idiots I don't know"
> Well I don't know you either, but a simple jpg is right there. If you
> don't want to look at the picture attached then you should look at
> the back of your box that contained XP. If you don't have the box,
> then you received the OS preinstalled with your PC (OEM). The
> agreement is right there on the outside of the "recovery" CD(s) as
> well as the 'owners manual that came with your PC. It was only to
> late for a refund if you installed the software. It says "If you do
> not accept the terms of the License Agreement, you should promptly
> return the product for a refund."
>
> No refund after install is for the protection of the software company
> ( you know what pirated software is don't you). Once you install it
> you now own the "right" to use it. You don't own nor ever will, the
> software. You just purchased the "right" to use it. Check your
> agreement, Microsoft retains ownership of the software, you have only
> purchased the license to use it. They may at any time remove your
> license, make you remove the software from your computer, and remove
> from you any copies of the software.
>
> I do expect Microsoft to take a stronger stance in dealing with
> "illegally" obtained software. After all they have a staff of
> attorneys who make more in a month than you will ever make in a
> lifetime. Microsoft can afford to stock the very best in their legal
> department. Can you afford to fight them? I sold software from many
> different companies over the years, but at every time before selling
> the software to any client, I explained the agreement to them in full
> before even closing the sale. Some of the software sold had to have a
> renewal of the license every year, the cost of this was also
> explained in full, as well as the results of not renewing the
> license, which was the removal of the software and recovering of all
> the media used in the install and operation of the software.
>
> I think the reason you don't want to look, is because you don't want
> to know you are wrong. Don't tell me you didn't know in advance
> before you installed XP, tell it to a jury and a judge. Maybe they
> will belive you over the attorney who is making 5+ million a year,
> but I wouldn't bet on it.
>
> Because I am tired of this insane argument against Microsoft's EULA,
> I hope that you find out the real truth soon. I think you need to
> contact an attorney, and sit down and show him the EULA and your
> argument against it, then hear it from someone who understands the
> law. I would say you are wrong in your understanding of the license
> agrement, but you wouldn't listen anyway. You are like my oldest son,
> he was never wrong. Even after he served 6 months in the county jail
> for underage DUI, the person who sold him the beer was in the wrong,
> he was never wrong for drinking it or driving a car after 3
> six-packs. Excuses are like a**holes, everyones got one.
>
> "old" devildog
> Sgt. U.S.M.C.
> --Semper Fi--

If the entire EULA is written on the box, which I very much doubt, then
it is printed so small that it is unreadable.

If MS thinks it is being materially harmed by my private non-commercial
use of MY copy of software, then they can sue me. But they won't,
because they are too afraid that they would lose.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
news:uv#MkyguFHA.1168@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl:

> "old" devildog wrote:
>> "Sorry, but I don't open attachments from idiots I don't know"
>> Well I don't know you either, but a simple jpg is right there. If you
>> don't want to look at the picture attached then you should look at
>> the back of your box that contained XP. If you don't have the box,
>> then you received the OS preinstalled with your PC (OEM). The
>> agreement is right there on the outside of the "recovery" CD(s) as
>> well as the 'owners manual that came with your PC. It was only to
>> late for a refund if you installed the software. It says "If you do
>> not accept the terms of the License Agreement, you should promptly
>> return the product for a refund."
>>
>> No refund after install is for the protection of the software company
>> ( you know what pirated software is don't you). Once you install it
>> you now own the "right" to use it. You don't own nor ever will, the
>> software. You just purchased the "right" to use it. Check your
>> agreement, Microsoft retains ownership of the software, you have only
>> purchased the license to use it. They may at any time remove your
>> license, make you remove the software from your computer, and remove
>> from you any copies of the software.
>>
>> I do expect Microsoft to take a stronger stance in dealing with
>> "illegally" obtained software. After all they have a staff of
>> attorneys who make more in a month than you will ever make in a
>> lifetime. Microsoft can afford to stock the very best in their legal
>> department. Can you afford to fight them? I sold software from many
>> different companies over the years, but at every time before selling
>> the software to any client, I explained the agreement to them in full
>> before even closing the sale. Some of the software sold had to have a
>> renewal of the license every year, the cost of this was also
>> explained in full, as well as the results of not renewing the
>> license, which was the removal of the software and recovering of all
>> the media used in the install and operation of the software.
>>
>> I think the reason you don't want to look, is because you don't want
>> to know you are wrong. Don't tell me you didn't know in advance
>> before you installed XP, tell it to a jury and a judge. Maybe they
>> will belive you over the attorney who is making 5+ million a year,
>> but I wouldn't bet on it.
>>
>> Because I am tired of this insane argument against Microsoft's EULA,
>> I hope that you find out the real truth soon. I think you need to
>> contact an attorney, and sit down and show him the EULA and your
>> argument against it, then hear it from someone who understands the
>> law. I would say you are wrong in your understanding of the license
>> agrement, but you wouldn't listen anyway. You are like my oldest son,
>> he was never wrong. Even after he served 6 months in the county jail
>> for underage DUI, the person who sold him the beer was in the wrong,
>> he was never wrong for drinking it or driving a car after 3
>> six-packs. Excuses are like a**holes, everyones got one.
>>
>> "old" devildog
>> Sgt. U.S.M.C.
>> --Semper Fi--
>
> If the entire EULA is written on the box, which I very much doubt, then
> it is printed so small that it is unreadable.
>
It's been a while since I had a boxed copy of Windows, but I do ave a new
copy of VS 2003. The retail box says that I must accept the agreement
before use. The smaller box that contains the CDs says the same thing.
Each CD says to not lend or make illegal copies of the software. Inside
the retail box is a 8 page document containing the EULA.

> If MS thinks it is being materially harmed by my private non-commercial
> use of MY copy of software, then they can sue me. But they won't,
> because they are too afraid that they would lose.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Asher_N wrote:

> It's been a while since I had a boxed copy of Windows, but I do ave a
> new copy of VS 2003. The retail box says that I must accept the
> agreement before use. The smaller box that contains the CDs says the
> same thing. Each CD says to not lend or make illegal copies of the
> software. Inside the retail box is a 8 page document containing the
> EULA.

So it is really a post-sale shrink-wrap license, since you don't get to
see the ALL of the terms until after the sale.

Then it comes down to interpretation.

SCO believes that IBM has violated the UNIX license. SCO's belief
doesn't mean dog-do unless they prove it in a court of law.

If MS thinks I've violated the Windows EULA, then they can sue me, but
they don't got the balls to do it, because they are afraid they'd lose.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in news:
#GMoJ1huFHA.2072@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:

> Asher_N wrote:
>
>> It's been a while since I had a boxed copy of Windows, but I do ave a
>> new copy of VS 2003. The retail box says that I must accept the
>> agreement before use. The smaller box that contains the CDs says the
>> same thing. Each CD says to not lend or make illegal copies of the
>> software. Inside the retail box is a 8 page document containing the
>> EULA.
>
> So it is really a post-sale shrink-wrap license, since you don't get to
> see the ALL of the terms until after the sale.
>

But you see them before you unseal the actual CDs. You can return the
software then. If the store refuses to take it back, contact MS.


> Then it comes down to interpretation.
>
> SCO believes that IBM has violated the UNIX license. SCO's belief
> doesn't mean dog-do unless they prove it in a court of law.
>
> If MS thinks I've violated the Windows EULA, then they can sue me, but
> they don't got the balls to do it, because they are afraid they'd lose.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Asher_N wrote:
> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in news:
> #GMoJ1huFHA.2072@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>
>> Asher_N wrote:
>>
>>> It's been a while since I had a boxed copy of Windows, but I do ave
>>> a new copy of VS 2003. The retail box says that I must accept the
>>> agreement before use. The smaller box that contains the CDs says the
>>> same thing. Each CD says to not lend or make illegal copies of the
>>> software. Inside the retail box is a 8 page document containing the
>>> EULA.
>>
>> So it is really a post-sale shrink-wrap license, since you don't get
>> to see the ALL of the terms until after the sale.
>>
>
> But you see them before you unseal the actual CDs.

No you don't.

> You can return the
> software then.

LOL!

> If the store refuses to take it back, contact MS.

F*#K MS. I'll use my copy of software according to what I feel is
legal, and if MS doesn't like it, then they can sue me.

That's how the law works. Of course MS would prove by a preponderance
of the evidence that they have a right to invade my privacy in my home,
that there EULA supercedes my right to "fair use" of my copy of
software, and that they been materially damaged by alleged breech of
terms.

MS won't do that, because there is a very good chance that they'd lose.

>> Then it comes down to interpretation.
>>
>> SCO believes that IBM has violated the UNIX license. SCO's belief
>> doesn't mean dog-do unless they prove it in a court of law.
>>
>> If MS thinks I've violated the Windows EULA, then they can sue me,
>> but they don't got the balls to do it, because they are afraid
>> they'd lose.

LOL! Do you think IBM should just give in to SCO's belief that IBM has
violated the Unix License?

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in news:#
5Y4FtiuFHA.1472@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl:

> Asher_N wrote:
>> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in news:
>> #GMoJ1huFHA.2072@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>>
>>> Asher_N wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's been a while since I had a boxed copy of Windows, but I do ave
>>>> a new copy of VS 2003. The retail box says that I must accept the
>>>> agreement before use. The smaller box that contains the CDs says the
>>>> same thing. Each CD says to not lend or make illegal copies of the
>>>> software. Inside the retail box is a 8 page document containing the
>>>> EULA.
>>>
>>> So it is really a post-sale shrink-wrap license, since you don't get
>>> to see the ALL of the terms until after the sale.
>>>
>>
>> But you see them before you unseal the actual CDs.
>
> No you don't.

Yes you do. The EULA comes printed in the box. The CD sleeves are sealed
independently.


>
>> You can return the
>> software then.
>
> LOL!
>
>> If the store refuses to take it back, contact MS.
>
> F*#K MS. I'll use my copy of software according to what I feel is
> legal, and if MS doesn't like it, then they can sue me.
>

It's not about what you feel. It's about what the law says.

> That's how the law works. Of course MS would prove by a preponderance
> of the evidence that they have a right to invade my privacy in my home,
> that there EULA supercedes my right to "fair use" of my copy of
> software, and that they been materially damaged by alleged breech of
> terms.
>

The EULA is a contract that more narrowly redifens your rights granted
under copyright law. By agreeing to it, you agree to be bound by them.


> MS won't do that, because there is a very good chance that they'd lose.
>
>>> Then it comes down to interpretation.
>>>
>>> SCO believes that IBM has violated the UNIX license. SCO's belief
>>> doesn't mean dog-do unless they prove it in a court of law.
>>>
>>> If MS thinks I've violated the Windows EULA, then they can sue me,
>>> but they don't got the balls to do it, because they are afraid
>>> they'd lose.
>
> LOL! Do you think IBM should just give in to SCO's belief that IBM has
> violated the Unix License?
>

 

[Alias]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

""old" devildog" <teyoungATmchsiDOTcom> wrote in message
news:%23VtDnWguFHA.3628@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> "Sorry, but I don't open attachments from idiots I don't know"
> Well I don't know you either, but a simple jpg is right there. If you
> don't
> want to look at the picture attached then you should look at the back of
> your box that contained XP. If you don't have the box, then you received
> the
> OS preinstalled with your PC (OEM).

Um, gerneric OEMs don't come with a box, nor is the EULA readable until you
open the packet and put the CD in your machine.

The agreement is right there on the
> outside of the "recovery" CD(s) as well as the 'owners manual that came
> with
> your PC. It was only to late for a refund if you installed the software.

No, it's too late after you open the package and before you can read the
EULA. Hence, a scam.

> It
> says "If you do not accept the terms of the License Agreement, you should
> promptly return the product for a refund."

Which can't be done. Catch 22 anyone?

Snip redundant drivel.

Alias

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

The EULA is presented on the internet to read before opening what ever
package it came in. It states that on the oem recovery disk, and the
"Owners" Manual I received with the purchase of my computer.

It gives this as the place to read the EULA....
www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/eula.

It states that you need to "read the EULA before accepting the terms of the
license".

If you don't have a home computer all ready set up, I am sure your local
public library has one to go check it out first.

Your all beating a dead horse. The opportunity to view the EULA before using
is presented in a format that allows anyone to have access to read it. The
court will have a problem with the argument you never saw it first.

It is not to late to return the computer with all software, after reading
the EULA online, as long as you never set it up or removed anything more
than the manual from the box. In most states you can return any computer or
software as long as the computer was never set up or the software was never
open or installed. That is why MS has the warnings on the outside of all
packages, and requires that your owners manual has the same warning.
Ignorance is never an excuse. You should always read all books and follow
all instructions before attempting to set up and computer or software.
Besides this argument has been going on for so many years, only a fool would
say they never heard of the EULA and what it states about the rights to
"use" the software as long as you follow the license you purchased. See all
you purchased was a license to use the software, you never purchased the
software itself. The license comes with a media disk of some kind to
install the software. You do not own the software, you don't even own the
media it came on nor any copies you made of it. Plain and simple law. I know
I had a company lawyer for years to advise me about all aspects of my
business. He reviewed all software agreements before I purchased any
software for resale to any client. Over 20 years of selling hardware and
software gives me an edge on what is legal and what is not.

I will say it again you are beating a dead horse. You are wrong about "your
rights" under copyright laws. Software is understood by the courts as
different than books. MS didn't set this precedent in the courts, but Radio
Shack did with TRS-DOS over 25 years ago. A federal court in Texas decided
that software was not owned by the customer but that the license to use the
software, as permitted by the owner of the software, was what the customer
purchased. MS like all software companies today use this to enforce the
license. The Supreme Court of the United States refused to hear the case on
appeal, stating that the court in Texas had followed the laws present at
that time to reach a fair decision. End of battle. The license agreement
included with all software is "an agreement to allow you to use the
software, not own it".

You are never going to change the laws that govern this nor will you ever
change you mind. You , in your mind are right, to the software companies and
the "law of the land" you are wrong. Don't believe me take MS or any
software company to court. As long as the outside of the software or the
manual to install the hardware or software contains the license agreement or
a location you can view it, they are following the law.

Just because you never personally read the exact law in your state or
country against driving while under the influence, doesn't mean you can do
so. Tell that to a judge and see where you end up. Ignorance of the law is
no excuse. And your post here show you know and have been told the extent of
the license you purchased from MS. Strong evidence in court to use against
you if MS decides to use it against you.
Remember never put anything on the internet you don't want to see again in
the years to come. Some one always has an archive of it somewhere.

"old" devildog
U.S.M.C.
-- Simper Fi --

"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:eE$fnlguFHA.2960@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
|
| ""old" devildog" <teyoungATmchsiDOTcom> wrote in message
| news:%23VtDnWguFHA.3628@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
| > "Sorry, but I don't open attachments from idiots I don't know"
| > Well I don't know you either, but a simple jpg is right there. If you
| > don't
| > want to look at the picture attached then you should look at the back of
| > your box that contained XP. If you don't have the box, then you received
| > the
| > OS preinstalled with your PC (OEM).
|
| Um, gerneric OEMs don't come with a box, nor is the EULA readable until
you
| open the packet and put the CD in your machine.
|
| The agreement is right there on the
| > outside of the "recovery" CD(s) as well as the 'owners manual that came
| > with
| > your PC. It was only to late for a refund if you installed the software.
|
| No, it's too late after you open the package and before you can read the
| EULA. Hence, a scam.
|
| > It
| > says "If you do not accept the terms of the License Agreement, you
should
| > promptly return the product for a refund."
|
| Which can't be done. Catch 22 anyone?
|
| Snip redundant drivel.
|
| Alias
|
|

 

[Alias]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

99% of Windows users do NOT know what EULA stands for and most of those
don't read it before installing Windows.

Hence, a scam, as MS and the other software giants are not ignorant of this
fact.

Alias

""old" devildog" <teyoungATmchsiDOTcom> wrote

Snip MS Toady drivel.

> "old" devildog
> U.S.M.C.
> -- Simper Fi --
>
> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
> news:eE$fnlguFHA.2960@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> |
> | ""old" devildog" <teyoungATmchsiDOTcom> wrote in message
> | news:%23VtDnWguFHA.3628@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> | > "Sorry, but I don't open attachments from idiots I don't know"
> | > Well I don't know you either, but a simple jpg is right there. If you
> | > don't
> | > want to look at the picture attached then you should look at the back
> of
> | > your box that contained XP. If you don't have the box, then you
> received
> | > the
> | > OS preinstalled with your PC (OEM).
> |
> | Um, gerneric OEMs don't come with a box, nor is the EULA readable until
> you
> | open the packet and put the CD in your machine.
> |
> | The agreement is right there on the
> | > outside of the "recovery" CD(s) as well as the 'owners manual that
> came
> | > with
> | > your PC. It was only to late for a refund if you installed the
> software.
> |
> | No, it's too late after you open the package and before you can read the
> | EULA. Hence, a scam.
> |
> | > It
> | > says "If you do not accept the terms of the License Agreement, you
> should
> | > promptly return the product for a refund."
> |
> | Which can't be done. Catch 22 anyone?
> |
> | Snip redundant drivel.
> |
> | Alias
> |
> |
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the user and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between the seller and the user.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://webdiary.smh.com.au/archives/_comment/001075.html
=================================================
""old" devildog" <teyoungATmchsiDOTcom> wrote in message news:%23IrgAtbuFHA.3740@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Going to do something I don't normally do, add an attachment. But I am doing
> so to show something.
>
> I scanned this right off of the back of the box. "post-sale shrink-wrap
> license" I think not. This is in plain sight on the back of the XP box. You
> are even told to check out the EULA before using. Unless yours came with a
> plain brown wrapper, it was easy to read.
>
> I am so tired of looking at the endless posts about who is right in this
> matter. Microsoft puts the warning in plain sight on the box. If you didn't
> see it, then get glasses, if you didn't read it then learn to read or have
> someone read it to you. If you decided to ignore it, then the words "dumb as
> a rock" comes to mind.
>
> Read the news, MS is cracking down on the unlicensed software out there.
> Look at what the recording industry is doing to the downloading of music. MS
> is right behind them. When you try an get an update from MS Updates and you
> fail the "test" do you think your ISP can't be noted, traced by court order,
> and a knock on your door by a processor server can't happen. Ask the people
> who kept swapping tunes on the internet. The court doesn't care who you are,
> all they care about is that you are now in court, going up against the
> biggest company in the world. The very company who wrote the software
> running on the judges desk right there in the court room. Bet you MS is soon
> for this path, and I bet it will come before the roll out of Vista. Are you
> willing to take the chance. By the way I have never failed the "test" to
> update or download any software from MS. The box tells it all. I purchased a
> full retail copy (not an OEM) of XP.
>
>
>
> "old" devildog
> --Simper Fi --
>
> "When I hit 50 I though, it's not that bad, now that I am pushing 60, all I
> can think of is where the hell are the brakes !"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
> news:O3qZO7VuFHA.3068@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> | Asher_N wrote:
> |
> | > Because it's a contract that you have agreed to.
> |
> | No, it is a post-sale shrink-wrap license.
> |
> | --
> | Peace!
> | Kurt
> | Self-anointed Moderator
> | microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
> | http://microscum.com/mscommunity
> | "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
> | "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
> |
> |
>
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"David Candy" <.> wrote in news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:

> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the user
> and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between the seller
> and the user.
>

The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS). Technically,
the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the cost is a licence fee.
The EULA spells out what you can do with the licence. You own the media but
not the contents.

 

[Alias]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96D25E1749E98compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
> "David Candy" <.> wrote in news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>
>> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the user
>> and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between the seller
>> and the user.
>>
>
> The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS). Technically,
> the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the cost is a licence
> fee.
> The EULA spells out what you can do with the licence. You own the media
> but
> not the contents.

Bullcrap. I don't see any musical groups or singers suing anyone for breach
of copyright. I see the music *companies* suing.

As the EULA is not available until it's too late to get your money back, the
EULA is a scam and deserves no respect.

Go to any computer store's web site and XP is listed as "software", not a
licence so the scam even begins before you buy the CD.

Alias

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Asher_N wrote:
> "David Candy" <.> wrote in news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>
>> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the user
>> and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between the seller
>> and the user.
>>
>
> The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS).
> Technically, the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the
> cost is a licence fee. The EULA spells out what you can do with the
> licence. You own the media but not the contents.

LOL! You have every right to believe the earth is flat. That does not
mean that the earth really is flat.

I purchased the copy of software from the previous owner, the retailer.
Transfer of ownership occurred at the time of sale.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in
news:ONOBjwfuFHA.2076@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:

>
> "Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns96D25E1749E98compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
>> "David Candy" <.> wrote in
>> news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>>
>>> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the user
>>> and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between the
>>> seller and the user.
>>>
>>
>> The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS).
>> Technically, the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the
>> cost is a licence fee.
>> The EULA spells out what you can do with the licence. You own the
>> media but
>> not the contents.
>
> Bullcrap. I don't see any musical groups or singers suing anyone for
> breach of copyright. I see the music *companies* suing.
>
> As the EULA is not available until it's too late to get your money
> back, the EULA is a scam and deserves no respect.
>
> Go to any computer store's web site and XP is listed as "software",
> not a licence so the scam even begins before you buy the CD.
>
> Alias
>
>

And software is an entity protected under copyright law. Only the holder
of the copyright owns the work. While you pay for the rights to use, you
never actually own it.

You have a choice of not accepting the EULA and returning the product.
The box also spells out that Windows is intended to install on a single
computer.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
news:eOQSn5fuFHA.3660@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl:

> Asher_N wrote:
>> "David Candy" <.> wrote in news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>>
>>> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the user
>>> and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between the seller
>>> and the user.
>>>
>>
>> The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS).
>> Technically, the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the
>> cost is a licence fee. The EULA spells out what you can do with the
>> licence. You own the media but not the contents.
>
> LOL! You have every right to believe the earth is flat. That does not
> mean that the earth really is flat.
>
> I purchased the copy of software from the previous owner, the retailer.
> Transfer of ownership occurred at the time of sale.
>

That's were you are fundamentely wrong. You never purchase copyrighted
material. You pay for the rights to use it.

 

[Alias]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96D26722A5B9Ecompguy666hotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in
> news:ONOBjwfuFHA.2076@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>
>>
>> "Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns96D25E1749E98compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
>>> "David Candy" <.> wrote in
>>> news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>>>
>>>> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the user
>>>> and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between the
>>>> seller and the user.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS).
>>> Technically, the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the
>>> cost is a licence fee.
>>> The EULA spells out what you can do with the licence. You own the
>>> media but
>>> not the contents.
>>
>> Bullcrap. I don't see any musical groups or singers suing anyone for
>> breach of copyright. I see the music *companies* suing.
>>
>> As the EULA is not available until it's too late to get your money
>> back, the EULA is a scam and deserves no respect.
>>
>> Go to any computer store's web site and XP is listed as "software",
>> not a licence so the scam even begins before you buy the CD.
>>
>> Alias
>>
>>
>
> And software is an entity protected under copyright law.

But you said I didn't buy any software but permission to use software. Which
is it?

> Only the holder
> of the copyright owns the work. While you pay for the rights to use, you
> never actually own it.

Like I said, a scam. Here, I am going to sell you "something" you won't own.

> You have a choice of not accepting the EULA and returning the product.

No, you don't. If you open the package and begin installation, *that's* when
you get to read the EULA and you cannot return opened software for a refund.
Do you understand the scam yet?

> The box also spells out that Windows is intended to install on a single
> computer.

I never questioned that so why do you bring it up? I do think it's ripping
off families that have two or more computers to require that but we all know
that MS is in the business of ripping off their customers and showing no
respect for their customers by making them prove, twice, that the
software/licence or whatever you want to call it, was not a pirated copy.
Accusing your paying customers of piracy until they prove differently
through a proven, flawed test is not very good PR.

Alias

 

[Alias]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96D268078ECA9compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
> news:eOQSn5fuFHA.3660@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl:
>
>> Asher_N wrote:
>>> "David Candy" <.> wrote in news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>>>
>>>> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the user
>>>> and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between the seller
>>>> and the user.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS).
>>> Technically, the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the
>>> cost is a licence fee. The EULA spells out what you can do with the
>>> licence. You own the media but not the contents.
>>
>> LOL! You have every right to believe the earth is flat. That does not
>> mean that the earth really is flat.
>>
>> I purchased the copy of software from the previous owner, the retailer.
>> Transfer of ownership occurred at the time of sale.
>>
>
> That's were you are fundamentely wrong. You never purchase copyrighted
> material. You pay for the rights to use it.

Then why do ALL the computer stores in the world say they sell XP software?
And NONE of them say they sell a licence to use XP software?

To perpetuate the scam, per chance?

Alias

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Asher_N wrote:
> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
> news:eOQSn5fuFHA.3660@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl:
>
>> Asher_N wrote:
>>> "David Candy" <.> wrote in
>>> news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>>>
>>>> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the
>>>> user and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between
>>>> the seller and the user.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS).
>>> Technically, the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the
>>> cost is a licence fee. The EULA spells out what you can do with the
>>> licence. You own the media but not the contents.
>>
>> LOL! You have every right to believe the earth is flat. That does
>> not mean that the earth really is flat.
>>
>> I purchased the copy of software from the previous owner, the
>> retailer. Transfer of ownership occurred at the time of sale.
>>
>
> That's were you are fundamentely wrong. You never purchase copyrighted
> material. You pay for the rights to use it.

I own my copy of copyrighted material, and I have the right to use it as
a condition of its sale.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in
news:u8fqvCguFHA.128@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl:

>
> "Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns96D26722A5B9Ecompguy666hotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
>> "Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in
>> news:ONOBjwfuFHA.2076@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>>
>>>
>>> "Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns96D25E1749E98compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
>>>> "David Candy" <.> wrote in
>>>> news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the
>>>>> user and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between
>>>>> the seller and the user.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS).
>>>> Technically, the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the
>>>> cost is a licence fee.
>>>> The EULA spells out what you can do with the licence. You own the
>>>> media but
>>>> not the contents.
>>>
>>> Bullcrap. I don't see any musical groups or singers suing anyone for
>>> breach of copyright. I see the music *companies* suing.
>>>
>>> As the EULA is not available until it's too late to get your money
>>> back, the EULA is a scam and deserves no respect.
>>>
>>> Go to any computer store's web site and XP is listed as "software",
>>> not a licence so the scam even begins before you buy the CD.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>>
>>>
>>
>> And software is an entity protected under copyright law.
>
> But you said I didn't buy any software but permission to use software.
> Which is it?
>

You can never buy copyrighted material. You either pay for the certain
rights to it, or you buy the copyright itself.


>> Only the holder
>> of the copyright owns the work. While you pay for the rights to use,
>> you never actually own it.
>
> Like I said, a scam. Here, I am going to sell you "something" you
> won't own.
>

That's what happens to any copyrighted material. How much rights do you
have to the contents of a book?


>> You have a choice of not accepting the EULA and returning the
>> product.
>
> No, you don't. If you open the package and begin installation,
> *that's* when you get to read the EULA and you cannot return opened
> software for a refund. Do you understand the scam yet?
>

That is the store's policy. If you took it to court and could prove that
you never installed the product, you'd be entitled to a refund.

>> The box also spells out that Windows is intended to install on a
>> single computer.
>
> I never questioned that so why do you bring it up? I do think it's
> ripping off families that have two or more computers to require that
> but we all know that MS is in the business of ripping off their
> customers and showing no respect for their customers by making them
> prove, twice, that the software/licence or whatever you want to call
> it, was not a pirated copy. Accusing your paying customers of piracy
> until they prove differently through a proven, flawed test is not very
> good PR.
>

What you think is irrelevant. The license says that you can install that
copyrighted work on a single machine. You have the right to either abide
by that, or not use the product.

> Alias
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in
news:OpRiqDguFHA.992@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl:

>
> "Asher_N" <compguy666@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns96D268078ECA9compguy666hotmailcom@207.46.248.16...
>> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
>> news:eOQSn5fuFHA.3660@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl:
>>
>>> Asher_N wrote:
>>>> "David Candy" <.> wrote in
>>>> news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the
>>>>> user and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between
>>>>> the seller and the user.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS).
>>>> Technically, the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the
>>>> cost is a licence fee. The EULA spells out what you can do with the
>>>> licence. You own the media but not the contents.
>>>
>>> LOL! You have every right to believe the earth is flat. That does
>>> not mean that the earth really is flat.
>>>
>>> I purchased the copy of software from the previous owner, the
>>> retailer. Transfer of ownership occurred at the time of sale.
>>>
>>
>> That's were you are fundamentely wrong. You never purchase
>> copyrighted material. You pay for the rights to use it.
>
> Then why do ALL the computer stores in the world say they sell XP
> software? And NONE of them say they sell a licence to use XP software?
>
> To perpetuate the scam, per chance?
>
> Alias
>
>
>

For the same reason that bookstore say they sell books. Possession of a
physical media does not transfer ownership of the content.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
news:ee3oVQguFHA.1572@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl:

> Asher_N wrote:
>> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
>> news:eOQSn5fuFHA.3660@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl:
>>
>>> Asher_N wrote:
>>>> "David Candy" <.> wrote in
>>>> news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the
>>>>> user and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between
>>>>> the seller and the user.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS).
>>>> Technically, the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the
>>>> cost is a licence fee. The EULA spells out what you can do with the
>>>> licence. You own the media but not the contents.
>>>
>>> LOL! You have every right to believe the earth is flat. That does
>>> not mean that the earth really is flat.
>>>
>>> I purchased the copy of software from the previous owner, the
>>> retailer. Transfer of ownership occurred at the time of sale.
>>>
>>
>> That's were you are fundamentely wrong. You never purchase copyrighted
>> material. You pay for the rights to use it.
>
> I own my copy of copyrighted material, and I have the right to use it
as
> a condition of its sale.
>

You own limited rights of use. You can't buy a book and the re-sell it
claiming that you were the author.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Asher_N wrote:
> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
> news:ee3oVQguFHA.1572@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl:
>
>> Asher_N wrote:
>>> "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in
>>> news:eOQSn5fuFHA.3660@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl:
>>>
>>>> Asher_N wrote:
>>>>> "David Candy" <.> wrote in
>>>>> news:ux0JOaduFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't matter what MS thinks. There is no contract between the
>>>>>> user and MS. There is one between MS and the seller and between
>>>>>> the seller and the user.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The agreement is between you and the copyright holder (MS).
>>>>> Technically, the seller only sells you the media. The rest of the
>>>>> cost is a licence fee. The EULA spells out what you can do with
>>>>> the licence. You own the media but not the contents.
>>>>
>>>> LOL! You have every right to believe the earth is flat. That does
>>>> not mean that the earth really is flat.
>>>>
>>>> I purchased the copy of software from the previous owner, the
>>>> retailer. Transfer of ownership occurred at the time of sale.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's were you are fundamentely wrong. You never purchase
>>> copyrighted material. You pay for the rights to use it.
>>
>> I own my copy of copyrighted material, and I have the right to use
>> it as a condition of its sale.
>>
>
> You own limited rights of use.

No, I own my copy of software, after I exchange cash for the copy of
software with the previous owner of the copy of software.

> You can't buy a book and the re-sell it
> claiming that you were the author.

I never calimed that I authored my copy of software. What a bogus
argument!

You didn't author it either, so I don't see why you have your panties in
a twist over what I believe are my rights to my copy of software.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"