Originally posted by: Bluestealth
I am ready to jump on the bandwagon too but I think they mean OEM as in dell/hp/gateway installed OSes... most of those people do not upgrade their motherboards anyways.
I don't know - I thought that some people have been stating that this is true, for some time. Either way, good luck to them enforcing this on the average user who gets an OEM copy of XP Pro with the rest of their system from Newegg. I have a legal copy of Windows, but this BS just makes me want to pirate it (maybe I'll just buy a new motherboard - that's close enough). :roll:Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Does this affect OEM software purchased before this change?
An upgrade of the motherboard is considered to result in a ?new personal computer? to which Microsoft® OEM operating system software cannot be transferred from another computer. If the motherboard is upgraded or replaced for reasons other than a defect, then a new computer has been created and the license of new operating system software is required.?
Yes OEM licenses have never been trasferable.Originally posted by: TechnoPro
Hasn't this always been the case? I always thought that the OEM license was paired with the botherboard. As others have stated, though, good luck enforcing that...
You mean "volume license" right pirate?Corporate edition FTW!
Originally posted by: Smilin
bunch of whiners.
You didn't bitch when you got that OEM license at half the cost of retail did you? wassamadderbaby did you think an IDE cable counted as a computer?
Me? I have a retail copy I paid for up front and I'll move it from machine to machine all day long.
Originally posted by: bersl2
Originally posted by: Smilin
bunch of whiners.
You didn't bitch when you got that OEM license at half the cost of retail did you? wassamadderbaby did you think an IDE cable counted as a computer?
Me? I have a retail copy I paid for up front and I'll move it from machine to machine all day long.
Seriously, if you want to use their software, you should agree to their terms.
That's (one reason, anyway) why I don't use their software.
I think Microsoft is being reasonable. I hope they will modify future OEM EULAs to be very straightforward to quote to the newbies, though. How's this look:Originally posted by: Smilin
Originally posted by: bersl2
Originally posted by: Smilin
bunch of whiners.
You didn't bitch when you got that OEM license at half the cost of retail did you? wassamadderbaby did you think an IDE cable counted as a computer?
Me? I have a retail copy I paid for up front and I'll move it from machine to machine all day long.
Seriously, if you want to use their software, you should agree to their terms.
That's (one reason, anyway) why I don't use their software.
I don't think they are terms that are at all unreasonable for any intellectual property holder to expect. I'm sorry you think the terms are unfair but I respect the fact that you don't try and violate them. :thumbsup:
The whole idea of software being legally "married" to a particular piece of hardware is a complete and utter FARCE.Originally posted by: mechBgon
It sounds to me like they're finally beginning to not look the other way anymore, when people try to claim that an IDE cable is what their OEM license is "married" to. Yeah, this IDE cable came with the system, so it's the same system, despite being morphed from a 1.7GHz Celeron into a dual-core A64 X2... riiiiiiiiiiight Maybe someone will mount a legal challenge to the claim that the motherboard is what the license is "married" to, since that's not explicitly stated in the existing OEM license.
Or rather, if you want to use their software, you should do so in accordance with the law. Not some made-up corporate fairy tale, designed to rake in greater profits through collusion, delusion, contusions, and other such things.Originally posted by: bersl2
Seriously, if you want to use their software, you should agree to their terms.
That's (one reason, anyway) why I don't use their software.
IP holders don't have the right to dictate the law to others... contrary to what current perception of the situation seems to be. People that care about their own rights, would certainly find MS's, and most other software companies', terms to generally be quite unreasonable. They stopped being reasonable the day that MS decided that they could and should dictate their terms to others, rather than simply accept and use copyright law for what it really is. Borland, OTOH, got it right, and sold their software, under terms "like a book". IOW, you can take your software whereever you want, so long as you delete it off of the prior system such that there aren't two installed copies existant at one time.Originally posted by: Smilin
I don't think they are terms that are at all unreasonable for any intellectual property holder to expect. I'm sorry you think the terms are unfair but I respect the fact that you don't try and violate them. :thumbsup:
I think Microsoft is being reasonable. I hope they will modify future OEM EULAs to be very straightforward to quote to the newbies, though. How's this look:Originally posted by: mechBgon
That's what a retail-boxed Windows license entitles you to do.Borland, OTOH, got it right, and sold their software, under terms "like a book". IOW, you can take your software whereever you want, so long as you delete it off of the prior system such that there aren't two installed copies existant at one time.
Originally posted by: mechBgon
That's what a retail-boxed Windows license entitles you to do.Borland, OTOH, got it right, and sold their software, under terms "like a book". IOW, you can take your software whereever you want, so long as you delete it off of the prior system such that there aren't two installed copies existant at one time.
Your analogy is crap.Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
The whole idea of software being legally "married" to a particular piece of hardware is a complete and utter FARCE.Originally posted by: mechBgon
It sounds to me like they're finally beginning to not look the other way anymore, when people try to claim that an IDE cable is what their OEM license is "married" to. Yeah, this IDE cable came with the system, so it's the same system, despite being morphed from a 1.7GHz Celeron into a dual-core A64 X2... riiiiiiiiiiight Maybe someone will mount a legal challenge to the claim that the motherboard is what the license is "married" to, since that's not explicitly stated in the existing OEM license.
Imagine if car dealers tried the same tactic - "Upon delivery of your new vehicle, it is 'married' to your particular driveway. If you move your place of residence, or even repave the driveway, you must purchase a NEW vehicle. The old vehicle will automatically be removed by the automotive license repo man".
The real legal meat and potatoes is - both the hardware and the software, were created and sold onto the OPEN MARKET. After that, the purchaser has every right to split up, re-sell, or simply re-use as they see fit. MS can burn in hell for attempting to preposterously claim otherwise... the law is the law. I follow the law, not MS's (crack) pipe-dreams.