Re: How do you to tell if you windows 98se is legal?
philo
> How do you to tell if you windows 98se is legal?
>
> I am pretty sure it is legal. The computer was used at several
> businesses along the way. Windows 98se was installed on it. Then
> was giving to me. (They lost the paperwork along the way). This
> are reputable businesses.
>
> The reason I was thinking of doing this, is so I can order the
> windows xp upgrade instead of the full. I want to be able to pass it
> the WGA test or validation.
>
> I would really like the full. I can not find it for under $70.00
>
> I don't know how windows 7 is going to be. I could wait it out, to
> see what happens. I read Vista is not to good. I am referring to
> buying a computer.
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
Moot point
Win98 is not a qualifying product
nor would any machine old enough to have come with Win98 even remotely
have good enough hardware to run Vista.
I've installed and evaluated both Vista and Win7 and can tell you that
Vista is definitely a flawed product.
But thus far it looks like Win7 has corrected most of what was wrong
with Vista...
So for now, do not bother with Vista...
but when it's time for you to buy a new machine...
when Win7 is officially available I'm sure you will be fine with it
philo
> Greg wrote:
>> How do you to tell if you windows 98se is legal?
>>
Sorry I left out the part that addresses your question regarding the XP
upgrade
If you have the COA sticker, your Win98 is legit,
but the XP upgrade will not be able to tell the difference
98 Guy
> How do you to tell if you windows 98se is legal?
Microsoft tests systems running XP for legitimacy by comparing their
product key to a list they have of "bad" or black-listed keys. So your
question can be re-stated as "is my windows 98 product key legit?".
Technically, you may have a legit product key, but be using it in an
illegitimate way, but Microsoft would or could never know that.
I don't think there is much written anywhere regarding widely-circulated
or widely-used Win-98 product keys, or if Microsoft has ever implimented
any database of misused win-98 product keys or took (or takes) any
action against them if they are encountered.
There are many widely-circulated lists of win-98 product keys, but it's
my impression that there is very little (or perhaps no) opportunity for
a win-98 system to interact with microsoft such that microsoft becomes
aware of the product key. And even if they do, there is no mechanism by
which microsoft can remotely disable the system or take any action
against it even if they wanted to.
This is a very different situation than what is the case with XP, for
which Microsoft is constantly testing every XP system against a list of
product keys that it has deemed to be illegitimate.
If you wanted to know if your win-98 product key has been circulated or
used on other systems (which would be one test for illegitimacy) would
be to perform a web search for the product key you are currently using.
To find your product key, run regedit and do a search for "productkey"
(no quotes). You'll find your win-98 product key (5 groups of 5
characters). A web-search for just the first group of 5 characters
should be sufficient.
> I am pretty sure it is legal. The computer was used at several
> businesses along the way. Windows 98se was installed on it. Then
> was giving to me. (They lost the paperwork along the way). This
> are reputable businesses.
I don't think that Microsoft has (or has ever had) an on-line "test your
windows 98 product key" utility or function on their website. Even if
they did, I certainly would never use it.
> The reason I was thinking of doing this, is so I can order the
> windows xp upgrade instead of the full. I want to be able to
> pass it the WGA test or validation.
Microsoft has stopped selling Windows XP licences to OEM distributors
earlier this year (end of January I think). There might still be some
system builder licenses left "in the channel". I highly doubt there are
any upgrade licenses left.
Even if you had an XP-upgrade license, it won't check the product key of
your current win-98 license anyways. It will just check to see if you
have a qualifying older version of windows installed on the system being
upgraded. That check can be something as simple as looking in the
c:\windows directory for the file "win.com".
> I would really like the full. I can not find it for under $70.00
Unless you know where to buy the "System Builder" version of XP, any
copy of XP you'll be able to get your hands on will almost certainly be
used, and the product key may not pass Microsoft's validation test when
you install it. You don't have to "take the wrapper off" in order to
see (and use) the product key. So anyone selling you a copy of XP
that's "still in it's wrapper" could be selling you a dud.
> I don't know how windows 7 is going to be. I could wait it out,
> to see what happens. I read Vista is not to good. I am
> referring to buying a computer.
Unless you build your own computer from individual components
(motherboard, hard drive, etc) then any computer you buy will almost
certainly already have some version of windows installed on it
(microsoft has a way of strong-arming computer vendors to make sure that
they install some OS on their computers, usually a Microsoft OS).
philo
>
> I thought buying an oem copy of windows xp was illegal? I was
> talking about buying windows xp upgrade or windows xp full retail at
> Amazon. I trust some of the sellers because they are regular stores
> that been is business for a long time. I would think they would
> know better than sell a illegal version.
>
> One thing that did surprise me. Is compusa is selling
> Microsoft Windows XP Home SP3 OEM Version
>
>
> To Philo,
> I was not talking upgrading to Vista. I was talking about getting
> windows xp upgrade off of Amazon. There are sellers there that are
> trust worthy and unlike ebay, there accounts can get suspend really
> easy. I could get it off of ebay but the prices are to high.
>
Yes (I am a rather ineffective speed reader I'm afraid)
As long as you have your Win98 cd (and it's not simply a factory
restore disk, then the upgrade version of XP should work.
When you go to install XP, the installer will ask you to insert a
qualifying product.
Fresh install advised as a direct upgrade to XP from within win98 will
generally result in less than an optimum result
>
> To Guy & Philo,
> After microsoft ends supprot for windows xp, there are suppose to
> issue a patch for activation, and Wga so people can keep using it.
> Just in case, they need to reinstall it.
>
>
> To All,
> What happened to windows ox (I think that what is called)
> It is a scaled down version of windows xp and can run some xp
> programs and software but is for education and also for people who had
> older system with less memory and cheaper and want to run xp programs
> without it being a memory or space hog. I would like to know where
> I could get that, It was made by Microsoft.
>
There is a "minimal" version of XP called "FLP"
(for legacy PC) but it's not sold in the USA.
With a few tweaks however. a standard version of XP can easily enough be
optimized to run fairly well with older H/W
One thing to do for sure ... go into the control panel and adjust for
best performance.
A third party utiility such as nLite
Also: Don't know what the specs of your old machine are,
but since you now use Win98 chances are you'd want to add some RAM if
you go with XP.
Though XP will run with 256 megs of RAM, 512 - 1 gig of RAM (or more)
is not a bad idea
>
> Greg
>
98 Guy
> To Guy.
>
> I thought buying an oem copy of windows xp was illegal?
For something to be illegal, it would be the state (and not a private
company or an individual) that would charge you and prosecute you in a
court of law. If you had acquired an XP oem license and had installed
XP using that license, and in doing so you violated the terms of the
EULA (license agreement), that transgression is not a violation of any
law, so it is not an illegal act. The worst that can happen is that
Microsoft can seek to recover financial dammages from you in civil
court.
What it comes down to is that when you're installing any software
product, and you get to the screen that is showing you the EULA, and
you're presented with two buttons [I agree] and [I don't agree], then
you must press the [I agree] button to continue installing the product.
The intent of the [I agree] button is to bind you to the contractual
obligations described by the EULA.
Microsoft has gone to great lengths to make sure that certain versions
of windows (oem, system-builder, retail, volume or institutional, etc)
are linked to certain hardware configurations (retail off-the-shelf,
laptop, home-built, small volume reseller, etc), and that a
corresponding product key must be used to make any given installation
functional. So they can mechanically or technically prevent you from
migrating some of these versions (and keys) to other systems. But in
case those methods fail, their fallback is that they force you to
"agree" to the terms of the EULA, which they have no idea if you really
are.
As far as I know, it is not "illegal" (in other words, it is not a
police matter) if anyone offers to sell a software product or license
(new or never used or even used) or if anyone purchases that product
through any sales channel (classified ad, ebay, etc). The police do not
scan the newspapers or on-line sites like ebay looking for people
selling XP licenses, oem or otherwise). Microsoft might, however. But
not the police.
> I was talking about buying windows xp upgrade or windows xp
> full retail at Amazon.
Yes, I see now that Amazon is selling the following:
- XP Pro "full version" (?) SP2 $240
- XP Pro SP3 for System Builders $115
- XP Pro 64-bit SP2b for System Builders $150
- XP Home SP3 for System Builders $102
System Builder software link:
Most of those are no longer available.
I was under the impression that the XP pro "Full Version" (above) is
really the Retail version, which was pulled from store shelves the night
before Vista was released.
If I were you, I'd buy the XP-home SP3 for system builders for $102.
You will never need or benefit from the extra stuff that XP-pro can do
that XP-home can't. (unless xp-pro can do multi-core CPU or do
multi-monitor and xp-home can't?)
If you really NEEDED XP-pro, then buy the System Builder version for
$115. It will install on any machine (oem, laptop, netbook, home-built,
etc) with no issues. But only one install per copy. No proof of any
previous windows version needed.
> One thing that did surprise me. Is compusa is selling
> Microsoft Windows XP Home SP3 OEM Version
It's clear that Microsoft has been doing quite a bit of back-peddling
when it comes to retail XP availability. They realize that there is
still a huge demand for XP and they are quietly satisfying it, despite
their published product roadmap availability information.
> To Guy & Philo,
> After microsoft ends support for windows xp, there are suppose
> to issue a patch for activation, and Wga so people can keep
> using it. Just in case, they need to reinstall it.
That's what Microsoft said back in 2001 when XP first came out. I will
believe it when I see it. I think they will keep the XP on-line product
activation and WGA mechanisms running for at least another 10 years.
MEB
http://www.google.com/search?q=pirated+software+laws+by+nation&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=pirated+software+laws+by+state&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=federal+software+piracy+laws&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=software+piracy+prosecutions&btnG=Search
Change the search terms a bit and you will find lots of other contrary
information regarding any supposed:
>it is not "illegal" (in other words, it is not a
> police matter) if anyone offers to sell a software product or license
> (new or never used or even used) or if anyone purchases that product
> through any sales channel (classified ad, ebay, etc).
Moreover, if you have access to Lexis-Nexis and other legal/law
specific sites, you will find many more in specific case files.
The purchase via a retail outlet would be a better choice to ANY
attempt to use or rely upon pirated software and any questionable software.
>
>> To Guy & Philo,
>> After microsoft ends support for windows xp, there are suppose
>> to issue a patch for activation, and Wga so people can keep
>> using it. Just in case, they need to reinstall it.
>
> That's what Microsoft said back in 2001 when XP first came out. I will
> believe it when I see it. I think they will keep the XP on-line product
> activation and WGA mechanisms running for at least another 10 years.
The WGA and other checks will apparently be held in place for quite
sometime. Even the 9X style, can be checked [as recently as the
beginning of this year] for files on-line at Microsoft purporting to
require such, via manual methods. The same I have posted in here previously.
Releasing other methods would be an opening to allowance of piracy and
would likely be taken/seen as Microsoft [a leader in DRM and other such
Laws and lobbying around the world] violating the agreements with other
developers regarding those activities.
--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---
98 Guy
> > The police do not scan the newspapers or on-line sites like
> > ebay looking for people selling XP licenses, oem or
> > otherwise). Microsoft might, however. But not the police.
(Meb's generic search url's omitted)
Meb thinks that by throwing out some search URL's, that by itself is
sufficient to justify any point he's trying to make. It's a form of
smoke screen. He thinks that the reader will be suitably impressed that
he can direct them to a screen-full of URL's that purport to support his
opinions or POV.
Note how he never quotes any specific material from any given URL to
support his position.
Meb, if you are claiming that there is any state or federal law that
makes it a criminal offense (subject to a jail term) to use or install
software contrary to the terms of its EULA, then provide a URL to that
law.
Don't provide a generic google search result containing pages of URL's
that purports to satisfy that request.
> Moreover, if you have access to Lexis-Nexis and other
> legal/law specific sites, you will find many more in
> specific case files.
Saying that, without providing a concrete, actual example, doesn't make
it so.
Your answers are, as usual, devoid of substance.
> The purchase via a retail outlet would be a better choice to
> ANY attempt to use or rely upon pirated software and any
> questionable software.
There's nothing to lose by trying to install (and validate) XP with a
hacked product key. If it works, it works. Beyond attempts to activate
a hacked key, there are several methods that can be used to bypass the
activation all together, or trick XP into thinking it's been activated
properly.
Again, there's no harm trying those methods for a new, clean install.
If it fails, you can always try and buy it.
> The WGA and other checks will apparently be held in place
> for quite sometime. Even the 9X style, can be checked [as
> recently as the beginning of this year] for files on-line
> at Microsoft purporting to require such, via manual
> methods.
While it's true that micro$haft requires you to perform some sort of
"validation" process when retrieving certain files from their download
site, in the case for win-98 it's not clear that they actually test for
banned product keys, and I've never read of anyone running 98 failing
that test.
MEB
I'm going to suggest you stop this NOW or I will trash you and your
crap ONCE AGAIN...
Take your garbage elsewhere...
Buffalo
Greg wrote:
> How do you to tell if you windows 98se is legal?
>
> I am pretty sure it is legal. The computer was used at several
> businesses along the way. Windows 98se was installed on it. Then
> was giving to me. (They lost the paperwork along the way). This
> are reputable businesses.
>
> The reason I was thinking of doing this, is so I can order the
> windows xp upgrade instead of the full. I want to be able to pass it
> the WGA test or validation.
>
> I would really like the full. I can not find it for under $70.00
>
> I don't know how windows 7 is going to be. I could wait it out, to
> see what happens. I read Vista is not to good. I am referring to
> buying a computer.
>
>
>
> Greg
I sure wouldn't worry about it. Just find the Product code on your Win98se
system and copy it down.
If you do an XP upgrade, borrrow a Win98se CD, if you don't have one of your
own, and when XP calls for proof of the previous OS, just insert that CD.
I would strongly suggest that you do a clean install of XP rather than an
upgrade, but that is up to you.
I would also suggest that you have at least 512MB of ram installed as the
minimum when install XP.
Buffalo
98 Guy
> I'm going to suggest you stop this NOW or I will trash you
> and your crap ONCE AGAIN...
Take your suggestion and shove it straight up your ass Meb.
That's where you pull all your inspiration from.
MEB
Hey at least I have inspiration, all you have is your outright lies,
stupidity, and pure horse ____.
Let me put those links back in:
http://www.google.com/search?q=pirated+software+laws+by+nation&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=pirated+software+laws+by+state&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=federal+software+piracy+laws&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=software+piracy+prosecutions&btnG=Search
Change the search terms a bit and you will find lots of other contrary
information regarding any supposed:
> >it is not "illegal" (in other words, it is not a
> > police matter) if anyone offers to sell a software product or license
> > (new or never used or even used) or if anyone purchases that product
> > through any sales channel (classified ad, ebay, etc).
Moreover, if you have access to Lexis-Nexis and other legal/law
specific sites, you will find many more in specific case files.
Now "get on home ta momma".. before I have to spank you again.
Jeff Richards
CD in the drive and to enter the W98 product key. The installation program
verifies the key and confirms that the CD is genuine.
If the key works for installing W98 then it will work for validating the XP
upgrade. However, if the CD (and its key) are for a version of W98 for
which there is no upgrade path available, the XP installation will detect
this (from the key) and will not permit the upgrade. Many OEM versions of
W98 are not eligible for the upgrade. The installation procedure works this
out from the key - although the upgrade does not check specific keys against
any 'known illegal' keys, it does confirm that the key is the correct type
for the disk, and it confirms that the disk/key combination is a valid
qualifying product..
If your CD is a genuine W98 full retail installation CD and if the key you
have works with that disk for installing W98, then the upgrade program will
run OK. If any of those things isn't the case, there may be a problem with
the upgrade.
You will get good information about installing an upgrade version of XP in
the XP newsgroups.
--
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
"Greg" <inv...@invalid.net> wrote in message
news:7ho22iF...@mid.individual.net...
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 12:14:53 -0400, MEB <MEB-n...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> How can a 95/98/me system be checked? I was just told earlier in this
> thread, the key couldn't be verified with windows 98se
>
> Greg
MEB
>> sometime. Even the 9X style, can be checked [as recently as the
>> beginning of this year] for files on-line at Microsoft purporting to
>> require such, via manual methods. The same I have posted in here previously.
>
> thread, the key couldn't be verified with windows 98se
>
> Greg
Jeff provided the variables regarding using a given key during the
upgrade process *to* XP, though you will need a valid key for XP; so
I'll deal with the underlaying issue of piracy...
Since this is now the fifth time or so I have tried to explain this,
consider this as the last time.
I will post this on the site with some additional material, and from
now on, point to it...
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/gen/windows/software-piracy-win98.htm
Windows 9X and illegal usage
Ask yourself who told you that and what the motivation might be.
Think of it like this:
You aren't dealing with counting the number of grains of sand on all
the beaches of the world, you're dealing with a comparatively small and
finite number of authorized copies of software, with some minimal ways,
*in 9X*, to test whether the copy is legitimate.
Microsoft *did* collect a large number of compromised keys from various
sources, including those published online during the course of the
support periods [95-ME]. So many in fact, that Microsoft pushed for and
received the creation of criminal Laws concerning piracy, AND helped to
create such things as DRM. WGA and DRM was included [early itinerations]
within 95, advanced a bit in 98, further in 98SE, ME [and Win2K] had
some early indications of what was soon to occur in XP. Those in Win98FE
and SE were modified during the course of the respective support
periods, both in certain upgrades, and within various third party
applications.
Your question deals with *HOW* can this be used.
The answer is rather easy. Since Win95, the MS OSs have included JAVA
and ActiveX, and scripting *host(s)*. These can be activated when
connecting to some site designed to test using these, to check within
the OS [and throughout the computer but that's another matter] for WHAT
OS [purportedly just for proper web presentation and statistics], and
more importantly for whether the copy IS legitimate. SOME [and I'll not
go further] can be retrieved WITHOUT the need for your authorization.
The CONSUMER [meaning you, the user] could SEE an *example* [which is
basically what the *requirement* was for on various pages] on
Microsoft's sites when requesting certain files for download, or, during
support, to test for legitimacy.
What this was actually for, was to *spread the word* that Microsoft DID
have ways/methods to test for illegal copies, and not JUST by testing
the keys.
Microsoft COULD have required a *legitimate copy of 98SE* or other
qualifying product for XP upgrades, yet ignored the 9X line knowing how
severely compromised it had been. It was more interested in moving its
base into its new HEAVILY controlled XP line which IS designed to
monitor illegal usage.
*WHY* does the MS site error when first using one of the pages that
tests the 9X system? Because the present tests are searching for NT
based illegal systems and use NT controls during the process. *However*,
if one collects the already downloaded control, and runs it manually,
then manually enters the produced number into the pop-up, one could [as
of the end of last year/beginning of this year] STILL test for
legitimacy of a Win98 product.
It takes/took a second or so to verify. Meaning Microsoft still has or
did have the ability to check for legitimate products in the 9X line.
Try to remember that even your home computer could likely EASILY hold
every known *invalid key/license* for every 9X and XP OS in existence,
with room to spare.
How accurate was it during the support period?
Microsoft would or could and DID refuse support unless the system was
verified. However, it appeared Microsoft was more interested in the
later stages [after XP release], in its Office products and their
validity [knowing most users would move eventually into its controlled
XP OS].
That's NOT stating that 9X can't still be verified as legitimate, nor
that illegal usage would NOT cause prosecution.
Naturally, those who expound upon using illegal stolen software and the
like, attempt to discredit this FACT, and have worked to DISABLE this
ability.
What does that mean for you?
Remember Microsoft doesn't need to file civil action, it is a criminal
matter for prosecution which carries prison term, heavy fines, and
damage assessment/recovery.
So unless your best buddy is the local, state, federal, or other
PROSECUTOR, who is NOT going to prosecute, it might be best to AVOID
illegal software and other such materials.
philo
> If you install an upgrade version of XP it will require you to put the W98
> CD in the drive and to enter the W98 product key. The installation program
> verifies the key and confirms that the CD is genuine.
>
I have *never* seen an XP upgrade ask for the *key* of the qualifying
product...
All it does is ask that the cd be inserted.
It reads it ..then later the user is prompted to re-insert the XP cd.
(FWIF: I just did a fresh install using an upgrade cd a few days ago)
Buffalo
Greg wrote:
> How do you to tell if you windows 98se is legal?
>
> I am pretty sure it is legal. The computer was used at several
> businesses along the way. Windows 98se was installed on it. Then
> was giving to me. (They lost the paperwork along the way). This
> are reputable businesses.
>
> The reason I was thinking of doing this, is so I can order the
> windows xp upgrade instead of the full. I want to be able to pass it
> the WGA test or validation.
>
> I would really like the full. I can not find it for under $70.00
>
> I don't know how windows 7 is going to be. I could wait it out, to
> see what happens. I read Vista is not to good. I am referring to
> buying a computer.
>
>
>
> Greg
Just checking on the Internet for XP , I found this as the first hit:
http://www.cdsfu.com/index.php?categoryID=87
I can't vouch for it either way, but it does seem that WinXPproSP2 (full
version) can be obtained for under $60 US.
Buffalo
MEB
> MEB
>
> I never said I stole the system! I was given a system by a business,
> regardless of what type of license is on it. I do know this much
> that a whole system can be transferred no matter what type of license
> the computer has and this includes volume license. Microsoft can not
> make you buy a new license for it either. I don't think they would
> want to deal with a bunch of small court claim lawsuits.
>
> In fact the emachine I had, had xp on it. It was a preinstalled
> volume license by emachine machine themselves. No activation was
> required and the first WGA worked without a problem. The machine
> quit after that.
>
> I read the xp group as well, I have never heard of xp asking you to
> enter the windows 9x product key. It just ask you to enter a path to
> the window 98se/me files. So, I agree with Philo here.
>
> You said the windows 98se/Me key check can be done on line at
> Microsoft. Send me a microsoft website link to that fact.
>
> Greg
>
I didn't indicate you WERE using a stolen version, I supplied
information regarding illegal usage WHICH YOU DID NOT READ, as you
indicate by your statement regarding civil complaint. Its a criminal
matter...
Find it yourself... I don't play games with parties attempting to
legitimized criminal usage, I provide information, in instances such as
this, regarding illegal usage..
MEB
> Greg wrote:
>> MEB
>>
>> I never said I stole the system! I was given a system by a business,
>> regardless of what type of license is on it. I do know this much
>> that a whole system can be transferred no matter what type of license
>> the computer has and this includes volume license.
NO, neither you or the business have any right whatsoever, to transfer
Microsoft's OWNED OS issued under bulk or specialty issuance. No user or
corporation or otherwise has EVER owned Microsoft's products.
NO business or party otherwise held under specialty or bulk agreement,
*unless released BY Microsoft*, may offer its OSs or software to any
other source or individual regardless of its installation or
transference of the respective computer.
I suggest you read the EULAs, and other inclusions and restrictions;
obtain the original agreement/contract for bulk/specialty Licensing; and
other related materials, INCLUDING the applicable Laws and rulings.
MEB
Greg wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:12:50 -0400, MEB <MEB-n...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> MEB wrote:
>>> Greg wrote:
>>>> MEB
>>>>
>>>> I never said I stole the system! I was given a system by a business,
>>>> regardless of what type of license is on it. I do know this much
>>>> that a whole system can be transferred no matter what type of license
>>>> the computer has and this includes volume license.
>> NO, neither you or the business have any right whatsoever, to transfer
>> Microsoft's OWNED OS issued under bulk or specialty issuance. No user or
>> corporation or otherwise has EVER owned Microsoft's products.
>>
>> NO business or party otherwise held under specialty or bulk agreement,
>> *unless released BY Microsoft*, may offer its OSs or software to any
>> other source or individual regardless of its installation or
>> transference of the respective computer.
>>
>> I suggest you read the EULAs, and other inclusions and restrictions;
>> obtain the original agreement/contract for bulk/specialty Licensing; and
>> other related materials, INCLUDING the applicable Laws and rulings.
>>
>
> handing a cd to the employer to put on a home computer. I am talking
> about the business or consumer handing over a whole computer system.
> What system is already installed, is allowed to be transfered no
> matter what type of license. I suggest you read the EULA,
> Even an OEM copy is transferable to another person, if the whole
> computer system goes with it. It is in the EULA
>
> Greg
Wrong, the issuance and allowance follows the ORIGINAL purchaser.
IF that party is a business under bulk or special license, THAT is the
binding contract... IF said computer is transferred to a general user,
the license is invalid...
ONLY *general consumption consumer* products may be transferred, and
ONLY if the agreement is followed TO THE LETTER OF LAW..
MEB
Greg wrote:
> illegal things. All I wanted is a Microsoft website to verify my
> key before I get an xp cd. Since you claim there is one, but you
> don't have proof. I more inclined to believe Philo.
>
> Now the business I got this system from, got if from another
> business, which got it from another business. Those businesses
> are reputable and would follow Microsoft licensing procedures. One
> of the business is a hospital.
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
READ what I posted AND the modified key issue per Jeff.
Doesn't matter. If the business or otherwise violates its agreement
under bulk or special license, it is a criminal matter, against them AND
you.
To USE any computer one might obtain from such a source, you MUST
purchase your own personal copy and install that, or you are violating
the Law.
REASON: you have likely also obtained some other software which you
have no license to use, hence another {set of} criminal act(s).
Businesses MIGHT be able to transfer the system among themselves *IF*
such allowance is included in the agreement WITH Microsoft. Otherwise it
is a violation of Law.
philo
> illegal things. All I wanted is a Microsoft website to verify my
> key before I get an xp cd. Since you claim there is one, but you
> don't have proof. I more inclined to believe Philo.
Thanks
I am glad someone around here believes me.
FWIW: I do volunteer work for a non-profit agency and am an authorized
Microsoft refurbisher...I've literally repaired or setup hundreds (more
likely thousands) of machines over the past ten years or so.
No expert yet...but no longer a complete noobie either <G>
MEB
Greg wrote:
> MEB
>
>> Doesn't matter. If the business or otherwise violates its agreement
>> under bulk or special license, it is a criminal matter, against them AND
>> you.
>> To USE any computer one might obtain from such a source, you MUST
>> purchase your own personal copy and install that, or you are violating
>> the Law.
>> REASON: you have likely also obtained some other software which you
>> have no license to use, hence another {set of} criminal act(s).
>>
>> Businesses MIGHT be able to transfer the system among themselves *IF*
>> such allowance is included in the agreement WITH Microsoft. Otherwise it
>> is a violation of Law.
>
>
> You are saying if I buy a preinstall oem computer from walmart. The
> computer system is mine and I can not sell or give it away. That is
> not true. The OEM is tied to the computer motherboard (Still not
> really verified what is a new computer from Microsoft) not the person.
>
> I reiterate that a computer (Regardless of what type license is on)
> can be sold or given to another person and they can use whatever
> operating system is installed on the computer legally without
> restriction.
>
> You are getting confused. This part is not allowed,
> You can not install an oem copy and put the same oem copy on another
> computer. That is not allowed.
>
>
> Greg
>
>
No 98 Guy/Greg, you used these SAME arguments the first two or three
discussions we had. You were ALREADY shown the failures of your arguments.
YOU are attempting to hold BULK/SPECIAL licensing as if it is the same
as an OEM license that you receive with a computer you might purchase in
Walmart//. THAT OEM license is tied to the machine and YOU when you
register it, which you may only transfer with THAT machine. And that is
one of the things that XP and above are designed to monitor.
Large businesses are assigned special authorization AND PRICING
[including support purchase], generally on a *PER SEAT* basis, NOT on
the particular computer used. The machines they may purchase MIGHT come
installed with a given system, however, the licensing is done under the
BULK/special license *NOT* the license as you, a general usage consumer,
would use when purchasing, say a Dell [OEM -converted to you and the
specific machine], from Walmart.
That does NOT free the OEM license for usage elsewhere [the OEM sticker
on the machine], nor does the *OEM "single consumer use" license* follow
the machine. The BINDING license is the bulk purchase license AS USED
for that machine [whatever is more constrictive - major OEMs do have
bulk unregistered licenses which they may use in corporate
structure/sales]; THAT license [using the OEM key] has been registered
with Microsoft as specific to the machine and *business*, other usage is
illegal.
It is as if the IT or other department had installed the OS at the
business.
There is NO method to convert a BULK/Special use license into a license
one might find in the general consumer world, e.g., OEM general
consumer, OS only general use purchase, or upgrade.
A small business MIGHT purchase a computer wherein the usual OEM
licensed OS IS tied to the specific machine and transferable. But if it
comes from a large business [bulk], GOVERNMENT institutions [generally
bulk/special use], school/University [special use], or similar, the
license is NOT convertible into a *consumer general use* license
regardless of where that machine might end up.
Jeff Richards
stated - the only way you can confirm that your system is legal is to ensure
that you acquired it through the proper procedures as set out in the EULA,
which only you are aware of (and no-one here should be interested in).
Your real point is whether or not it will be accepted as a qualifying
product for the upgrade. As mentioned the XP people can answer that better
than anyone here, as the upgrade is actually as XP, not W98, procedure. The
most important issue is whether the version is an upgradeable version or
not - many OEM versions (and possibly the bulk-licensed versions) are not
upgradeable.
If you can provide an exact description of the CD labelling or the product
number someone may be able to identify the version. But you will still need
to check with the XP people whether or not that version is a 'qualifying
product'..
--
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
"Greg" <inv...@invalid.net> wrote in message
news:7hq07nF...@mid.individual.net...
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:41:44 -0400, MEB <MEB-n...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> snip <
>
> There you go accusing me of doing illegal things. I don't do
> illegal things. All I wanted is a Microsoft website to verify my
> key before I get an xp cd. Since you claim there is one, but you
> don't have proof. I more inclined to believe Philo.
>
MEB
> Please ignore the lecturing and accusations. The basic point is as you have
> stated - the only way you can confirm that your system is legal is to ensure
> that you acquired it through the proper procedures as set out in the EULA,
> which only you are aware of (and no-one here should be interested in).
>
> Your real point is whether or not it will be accepted as a qualifying
> product for the upgrade. As mentioned the XP people can answer that better
> than anyone here, as the upgrade is actually as XP, not W98, procedure. The
> most important issue is whether the version is an upgradeable version or
> not - many OEM versions (and possibly the bulk-licensed versions) are not
> upgradeable.
>
> If you can provide an exact description of the CD labelling or the product
> number someone may be able to identify the version. But you will still need
> to check with the XP people whether or not that version is a 'qualifying
> product'..
>
Don't start again Jeff, I have accused no one.
The lecture, on the other hand, merely displaces the attempt to falsely
indicate potentially legal usage of products which may not be so qualified.
And yes, the XP group would like be the best place to discuss XP
issues. Let's hope that group can properly advise.
98 Guy
> Just checking on the Internet for XP , I found this as the first
> hit: http://www.cdsfu.com/index.php?categoryID=87
>
> I can't vouch for it either way, but it does seem that
> WinXPproSP2 (full version) can be obtained for under $60 US.
cdsfu is a scam:
http://forums.techguy.org/windows-nt-2000-xp/792940-windows-xp-pro-54-99-a.html
Read the last post on page 2 of that thread.
If you do a google search for "cdsfu.com scam" (no quotes) you'll find
much speculation about what exactly they are selling.
MEB
> computers with operating systems still on them? I saw some with
> windows 98se, me, 2000, nt, and xp? Did they get special permission
> from Microsoft. (However, in case of the government, they may be
> allowed to do it because of state or federal law).
They are SUPPOSED to delete the system and all apps. They have no
"resellers" license *unless* part of their agreements.
What you may be thinking of is computers with systems installed with no
authorization. The buyer is then required to retrieve that authorization
[buyer beware] from Microsoft. To ensure proper *legal* usage would
require doing as I previously indicated; ignorance of Law is no excuse.
There have been numerous parties who have purchased those used
computers and found they were impossible to legally validate, or ceased
to function at some point [disabled].
That happens to be another ability built into XP and above OSs.
>
> I don't think windows 98se had a special license for businesses.
It did, the same previously mentioned. ANY commercial OS used within
the corporate/business environment is generally issued under those forms
of licensing [yes, even commercial Linux versions]. You can find that
information available on those sites, such as: Red Hat Enterprise
Edition, Server, etc...
>
> I just remembered something, the system I have is legal. The
> reason I know this it had some stuff that was preinstalled from Compaq
> on this system. So, an upgrade copy of xp should work fine without
> any problems. The only thing that concerns me, is if some
> computer repair person changed the key. That they only reason I
> wanted to check for the key.
>
> The reason, I didn't remember this sooner, is because I uninstalled
> the Compaq stuff from this computer.
>
> I ended up answering my own question.
>
> Greg
Glad that worked out... as others have indicated [and I did as well],
your 9X key and validity is not a real issue -for- the XP upgrade [you
will BECOME legal regardless of prior usage/status]. Your *legal* XP key
and validation is what will be crucial.
Sorry if you felt otherwise or mistook the intent of my prior
presentations.
A side clarification: per the above; you would become legal only if you
removed the illegal or questionable 9X. Though in your case, Greg, that
seems to not be an issue.
MEB
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:42:41 -0400, MEB <MEB-n...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> :
>
>> They are SUPPOSED to delete the system and all apps. They have no
>> "resellers" license *unless* part of their agreements.
>>
>> What you may be thinking of is computers with systems installed with no
>> authorization. The buyer is then required to retrieve that authorization
>> [buyer beware] from Microsoft. To ensure proper *legal* usage would
>> require doing as I previously indicated; ignorance of Law is no excuse.
>> There have been numerous parties who have purchased those used
>> computers and found they were impossible to legally validate, or ceased
>> to function at some point [disabled].
>> That happens to be another ability built into XP and above OSs.
>>
>
> sell or give it away to non-profits). The reason, is libraries have
> special exemption to copyright law or the patron would not be allowed
> to use anything or checkout anything.
No, the reason is, they have the afore mentioned Special use license
[like shared computers at schools/Universities]... that does not,
however, authorize this supposed "sale" you mention.
They MIGHT be able to give-away to a non-profit organization [depending
upon their agreement] who can ONLY use it within that organization. The
non-profit can NOT then sell the computer at any point, the controlling
license is the *Special* use authorization. There can be no SALE
involved, nor regular consumer usage [such as you ending up with the
computer in your home].
>
> I still disagree that a large business, corporation, schools has to
> remove the operating system or the hard drive before selling or giving
> a computer away. It still being done today by those I just
> mentioned.
It doesn't matter what you disagree with, it is the Law which
determines the issue.
IF, as you state, this is being done, then they are in violation of the
Law, *unless* authorized to do so. That also do NOT relieve any party to
whom it has been transferred, it would only be a defense; ignorance of
the Law is no excuse, only a matter for consideration.
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/gen/windows/software-piracy-win98.htm
note the links to applicable Laws, precedent, cases, international
activities, organizations gathering evidence for criminal actions, etc.
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/fedstat/copyright.htm
note the supposed arguments and the ACTUAL relationship to Law.
Your desires mean nothing, the Law defines what shall occur.
>
> Myself, I wouldn't really want a old computer with a hard drive
> installed. Who knows what has been on there.
>
>
> Greg
>
That's a sensible approach for most of the general population.
MEB
> do with piracy and I still disagree.
I didn't, i provided the LAW.
>
> Any business, schools, government can give or sell a computer away
> with whatever software is installed on the computer including the
> operating system.
NO THEY MAY NOT... unless authorized to do so.
>
> I do know for a fact a library most certainly can give or sell a
> computer with an operating system already installed. That because of
> a special federal law, that allows them to sell it for fund raising.
> It does not matter what type of license the computer has on it. The
> person it is sold to, most certainly can use it legally. Libraries
> have special privileges that allow them to do more things than a
> regular business, corporations, schools can do. This reason I know
> this is their computer tech told me and they went to Microsoft
> seminars.
SHOW ME the federal Law which in fact over-rides the Microsoft
agreement. Microsoft's Seminars are ALWAYS misconstrued by those attending.
That person is a TECH not: an attorney; authorized party; judge;
prosecutor; or in any way qualified to provide any form of knowledge
related to the related matters.
The parties holding those Seminars are NOT qualified to inform what can
be done with any operating systems or otherwise UNLESS authorized by
Microsoft AND the legal department to make such comments.
>
> Aside from the library. I don't know if the businesses, schools,
> government, corporations got permission from a Microsoft rep to sell
> them. They may have.
>
> All over the United States and maybe even the world. Business,
> schools, government , and libraries are selling the computer with the
> operating system installed. I hear about this on the news and
> online.
>
> If they have over 1000 systems would a business really want to take
> the time to remove the operating system? How would people know the
> system works? I can see them restoring it back to a clean install but
> that is it.
>
>
> Greg
Doesn't matter what you HEAR or READ, what matters is what the LAW
allows... you can ALSO read what has been done to those in violation of
their agreements.
Since now you ONLY wish to extend useless and ininformed ideas, rather
than even READING the applicable materials, the ENTIRE discussion
stands, for your part, as nothing more the personal desire.
So what... I wish money grew on trees,,, it doesn't, and neither does
what you think exists fall under the present Law.
End of discussion. I would suggest you actually READ the applicable
statutes and other that apply.
.
"MEB" <MEB-n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:#ND$wJ0OKH...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
<Big-snip>
Take a chill-pill, billy-brown-noser.
MEB
HAHAHA, so now we have the normal completely ignorant USENUTTER
posting... how cute, does your mommy know your using the computer again?
I could care less what Microsoft wants you idiot... I CARE that some
person WILL get prosecuted BECAUSE that's IS the Law, and a CRIMINAL act...
MEB
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 01:11:50 -0400, MEB <MEB-n...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Snip
>>> Any business, schools, government can give or sell a computer away
>>> with whatever software is installed on the computer including the
>>> operating system.
>> NO THEY MAY NOT... unless authorized to do so.
>>
>>> I do know for a fact a library most certainly can give or sell a
>>> computer with an operating system already installed. That because of
>>> a special federal law, that allows them to sell it for fund raising.
>>> It does not matter what type of license the computer has on it. The
>>> person it is sold to, most certainly can use it legally. Libraries
>>> have special privileges that allow them to do more things than a
>>> regular business, corporations, schools can do. This reason I know
>>> this is their computer tech told me and they went to Microsoft
>>> seminars.
>> SHOW ME the federal Law which in fact over-rides the Microsoft
>> agreement. Microsoft's Seminars are ALWAYS misconstrued by those attending.
>> That person is a TECH not: an attorney; authorized party; judge;
>> prosecutor; or in any way qualified to provide any form of knowledge
>> related to the related matters.
>> The parties holding those Seminars are NOT qualified to inform what can
>> be done with any operating systems or otherwise UNLESS authorized by
>> Microsoft AND the legal department to make such comments.
>>
>
>
> they would have a lawyer there.
>
> Federal or state law always overrides contracts.
>
> A clause is usually say something like this. If any part become
> illegal by law, the rest of the contract shall remain enforce.
>
>
>
>
>>> If they have over 1000 systems would a business really want to take
>>> the time to remove the operating system? How would people know the
>>> system works? I can see them restoring it back to a clean install but
>>> that is it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Greg
>> Doesn't matter what you HEAR or READ, what matters is what the LAW
>> allows... you can ALSO read what has been done to those in violation of
>> their agreements.
>
> selling old computers to general public. Microsoft still has a
> public image to maintain. Do you think I would really believe a
> person on a newsgroup compared to a tech that went to college and has
> been certified by Microsoft?
Man, you REALLY *are* uninformed.... all that has to be done [if a
party BUYS one of the illegally transferred systems] and IS done, is the
OS is disabled remotely.... that happens to be the PRIMARY reason for
the controls in XP and above... IF that party then re-enables the
criminally obtain OS or other software, or dis-allows its disablement
there is UNFAILING evidence of *criminal intent*....
So why don't you actually BECOME informed... and remove that ring from
your nose....
>
>
> Microsoft doesn't always follow the law either. (See case referring
> I.E, integration of windows). The justice department won against
> Microsoft. In Europe, Microsoft has to issue windows 7 and above
> without IE installed. From what I read about on this, I am
> surprised that the Justice department didn't go after Microsoft for
> integrating IE into other windows operating system.
>
>
> Greg
>
>
> ======================================
> Disclaimer, this are just what I have read or heard about and the
> rest my opinion.
MEB
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:18:30 -0400, MEB <MEB-n...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Man, you REALLY *are* uninformed.... all that has to be done [if a
>> party BUYS one of the illegally transferred systems] and IS done, is the
>> OS is disabled remotely.... that happens to be the PRIMARY reason for
>> the controls in XP and above... IF that party then re-enables the
>> criminally obtain OS or other software, or dis-allows its disablement
>> there is UNFAILING evidence of *criminal intent*....
>>
>
>
> I don't what dream world you live in, but the operating system can
> not be disabled remotely.
>
> What I have read for those people who bought legally installed system
> or legal copies that had activation and wga problem (See winxp groups
> for proof). All they get is a notice, that says "You may be a
> victim of counterfeit software, please click here to resolve the
> problem. There system is not disabled remotely. They just cant
> update their system the normal way using windows update. They can use
> windiz update or set the computer to download updates automatically.
>
> I was told that any computer can be giving away or sold to someone
> else no matter what operating system is installed on it. Even if
> you lost the paper work, it can still be sold. Microsoft does not
> own the computer itself.
>
>
>
> Hmm? interesting
>
>> So why don't you actually BECOME informed... and remove that ring from
>> your nose....
>>
>
>
>
> --->Take a chill-pill, billy-brown-noser.
>
> and your reply was
>
> ---> HAHAHA, so now we have the normal completely ignorant USENUTTER
> --->posting... how cute, does your mommy
> --->know your using the computer again?
>
> ---> I could care less what Microsoft wants you idiot.
> --->I CARE that some person WILL get prosecuted
> --->BECAUSE that's IS the Law, and a CRIMINAL act..
>
>
> Who's acting childish? Not the anonymous poster.
>
> Greg
And what do you think is being collected DURING that illegal usage...
or is it that you do NOT understand that once a criminal act is
committed/discovered, most of your normal rights and protections are
removed/suspended...
So actually who IS the child or at least in that mental range,,
certainly not me...
Buffalo
Damn, thanks for the heads up.
Buffalo
Buffalo
Buffalo wrote:
> Just checking on the Internet for XP , I found this as the first hit:
> http://www.cdsfu.com/index.php?categoryID=87
> I can't vouch for it either way, but it does seem that WinXPproSP2
> (full version) can be obtained for under $60 US.
> Buffalo
DISREGARD the above link with the PHONEY offer.
It appears to be a SCAM!!!
Sorry,
Buffalo
PS: Seems like they are based in Malaysia and you money will be toast.
.
> . wrote:
>>
>> "MEB" <MEB-n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:#ND$wJ0OKH...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>
>> <Big-snip>
>>
>> Take a chill-pill, billy-brown-noser.
>
> HAHAHA, so now we have the normal completely ignorant USENUTTER
> posting... how cute, does your mommy know your using the computer again?
>
Does your mommy know you wear her clothes,
and then masturbate in the closet?
> I could care less what Microsoft wants you idiot... I CARE that some
> person WILL get prosecuted BECAUSE that's IS the Law, and a CRIMINAL
> act...
>
That`s not your problem, wanker!!
![PA Bear [MS MVP]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjXsf05hH-R8XChS3fXPPzfoO8FYYxAKhT86KfPnIELr3QJ9tQ=s40-c)
PA Bear [MS MVP]
Do you have the Win98 box's COA number?
Can you Validate here? =>
http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/validate/ValidateNow.aspx
Can the Win98 box handle XP? => http://support.microsoft.com/kb/316639
--
~PA Bear
www.banthecheck.com
Greg wrote:
> How do you to tell if you windows 98se is legal?
>
> I am pretty sure it is legal. The computer was used at several
> businesses along the way. Windows 98se was installed on it. Then
> was giving to me. (They lost the paperwork along the way). This
> are reputable businesses.
>
> The reason I was thinking of doing this, is so I can order the
> windows xp upgrade instead of the full. I want to be able to pass it
> the WGA test or validation.
>
> I would really like the full. I can not find it for under $70.00
>
> I don't know how windows 7 is going to be. I could wait it out, to
> see what happens. I read Vista is not to good. I am referring to
> buying a computer.
MEB
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:23:42 -0400, MEB <MEB-n...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> And what do you think is being collected DURING that illegal usage...
>> or is it that you do NOT understand that once a criminal act is
>> committed/discovered, most of your normal rights and protections are
>> removed/suspended...
>>
>> So actually who IS the child or at least in that mental range,,
>> certainly not me...
>
>
> does not take that right away either)
>
> I read about activation and WGA, no personal data is sent to
> Microsoft. It also in the EULA, that pops up on install for
> activation and the WGA.. I had an xp computer, that how I know
> this.
>
> I really can't see some big corporation going after an 80 year old who
> buys a used computer from a business, school or the government,
>
>
>
> Greg
Again you attempt to dismiss what occurs, its not Microsoft, its those
investigating and prosecuting criminal activity. There is an *open and
public* display/indication of such activity... single mothers, children,
and NUMEROUS others have been taken to court ACROSS the planet....
Do you ever READ the news or pay attention to the "real world"... those
engaged DO fall under review via International Anti-terrorism Laws, the
Patriot Act, and the numerous like Laws erected across the world. There
ARE International groups/Agencies and US groups/Agencies using these
types of activities as leverage...
Like I said before, the discussion is over... TRY to make an effort to
find out what the world actually is... you are, presently, a waste of
time...
MEB
ADDENDUM:
Before you post the next group of nonsense, consider this:
Contrary to all those engaged in illegal usage, cracks and the like,
and what they will tell you; the WGA, LEGAL verification, and other
inbuilt activities in XP and above, are your PROTECTION from any
*extra-criminal* review due to a failure or otherwise... some other
leverage will need to be found.
Personally, I don't like this WGA, activation, and constant validation
activity [or the other DRM activities] but one CERTAINLY can not ignore
what it means and does...
So leave why don't you leave it here...
MEB
> that they may have bought from those places I mentioned. The
> government does not come after people for obtaining an operating
> system illegally (Assuming you are correct-which I doubt). I
> think you took wargames movie and WarGames: The Dead Code movie to
> seriously it is fiction.
>
> I know some of those cases your talking about, the computer or
> operating systems were not bought illegal. It is what the people
> did after words. The did illegal activity. The only reason some
> got caught is because a friend or a neighbor told on them. (I am
> leaving the RIAA out of this, that a whole different ball of wax)
>
>
>
> Greg
>
Uhuh,,, so you you persist in your ignorance.. its a conscious choice
you make... good luck.
Sunny
>. wrote:
>>
>> "MEB" <MEB-n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:#ND$wJ0OKH...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>
>> <Big-snip>
>>
>> Take a chill-pill, billy-brown-noser.
>
> HAHAHA, so now we have the normal completely ignorant USENUTTER
> posting... how cute, does your mommy know your using the computer again?
>
> I could care less what Microsoft wants you idiot... I CARE that some
> person WILL get prosecuted BECAUSE that's IS the Law, and a CRIMINAL
> act...
Another example of your arrogance, that just because a person accesses a
news group through Usenet (normal procedure) you classify them as beneath
you.
FWIW here in Australia there are ads in every daily newspaper "Ex Govt.
computers for sale, complete with Operating System and Internet access".
(I know two people who have bought them and no "activation has been
required, and their OS has not been "disabled".
Get out into the real World, for instance in most stores in Malaysia and
Singapore OEM CDs are on display for sale without any hardware purchase
required. (and this in a Country that Microsoft has a large assembly plant
that supplies Microsoft products to South East Asia)
MEB
AHHH, Sunny, why don't ONE of you actually look at those search and
links provided THEN come back and TRY to continue as you are...
might want to check those prosecutions around the world...
Sunny
I have "looked at" dozens of "prosecutions around the world" and the vast
majority are against organised piracy groups that sell there stuff as
"genuine".
Prosecutions against individual users are a different story, and the
majority have been thrown out of court.
I attended a Microsoft seminar and product display in Singapore, and even
there a couple of attendants were surprised that I intended to buy a
retail copy of WinXP, and hinted that far cheaper alternatives were
readily available.
MEB
Yep, just as the music CIVIL prosecutions make the news, so do the
MAJOR criminal prosecutions. Sorry doesn't mean anything,, keep looking.
So did you by some of those illegal copies???
Sunny
Not as directed by you
> So did you by some of those illegal copies???
Actually, it's none of your business.
Your true arrogant "know it all" persona comes across very clear in your
posts, that, coupled with your paranoid claims on your web site, that the
US Law makers are out t get you, explains you even further.
IMHO if you stopped taking the "I am Holier than thou pills" and allowed
some common sense into your thinking.
Your insults point to your narrow mindness as well e.g. :
"Of course we ALL already knew that you were a fool, and a criminal...
now go back to that rock where you crawled out from."
"Do I care what YOU believe? No.. You continue to proceed in a manner
similar to 98 Guy,,, apprised of what actually IS the Law, and the
DEFINING aspects which ARE relevant, you nonetheless, refuse to accept
it because it conflicts with what you WISH to occur."
" What I care about is what others are apprised of, and violating the Law
is not something I will condone or further."
Just who do you think you are with your arrogant "violating the Law
is not something I will condone or further." ?
You have been proved wrong about selling computers with a Microsoft Op
System installed, live with it (or at least have the common decency to
admit your erred)
J. P. Gilliver (John)
<MEB-n...@hotmail.com> writes:
[]
> What does that mean for you?
> Remember Microsoft doesn't need to file civil action, it is a criminal
>matter for prosecution which carries prison term, heavy fines, and
>damage assessment/recovery.
That will vary from country to country. (And possibly within the USA
too, though it could be federal laws.)
> So unless your best buddy is the local, state, federal, or other
>PROSECUTOR, who is NOT going to prosecute, it might be best to AVOID
>illegal software and other such materials.
>
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **
Fortunately, those were the days when you were promoted for incompetence in the
hope that, eventually, they would hit on something you could actually do. - Sir
David Hatch (of his time at the BBC), Radio Times 18-24 March 2006 (page 119.)
J. P. Gilliver (John)
<MEB-n...@hotmail.com> writes:
[]
> YOU are attempting to hold BULK/SPECIAL licensing as if it is the same
>as an OEM license that you receive with a computer you might purchase in
>Walmart//. THAT OEM license is tied to the machine and YOU when you
>register it, which you may only transfer with THAT machine. And that is
>one of the things that XP and above are designed to monitor.
[]
I was surprised that this (legitimate, bought new in May this year) XP
Home machine (a netbook; with SP3) did not require activation or
registration; I actually read the EULA quite carefully (it was
configured by the manufacturer [Samsung] and Microsoft, between them,
such that I could read the EULA before using), and was under the
impression that I was going to have to go through the activation process
(which I was, obviously as it's legal, going to do). I was going to do
it over the 'phone, but it never prompted me to activate (and I've been
using it longer than any eval. period).
.
son of a bitch
Just because items are on sale in Malaysia and Signapore as OEM without
selling hardware doesn't make it Okie Dokie.
However...
This agreement can also mean any computer hardware ie: a mouse or cable
and still qualify for a OEM. So by selling without hardware it is in
breach of the agreement but in Malaysia control is out of control and
nobody gives a shit and nearly all Pirate anyway.
And Malaysia and Singapore is the largest producer of Pirate Copies,
there are probably more pirate copies sold than legit ones.
MEB
did:> > news:eg%231Ma%23OKH...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> >> links provided THEN come back and TRY to continue as you are...
>> >> might want to check those prosecutions around the world...
> >
> > I have "looked at" dozens of "prosecutions around the world" and the
vast
> > majority are against organised piracy groups that sell there stuff as
> > "genuine".
> >
> > Prosecutions against individual users are a different story, and the
> > majority have been thrown out of court.
> >
> > I attended a Microsoft seminar and product display in Singapore, and
even
> > there a couple of attendants were surprised that I intended to buy a
> > retail copy of WinXP, and hinted that far cheaper alternatives were
> > readily available.
> >
> >
Yep, just as the music CIVIL prosecutions make the news, so do the
MAJOR criminal prosecutions. Sorry doesn't mean anything,, keep looking.
So did you buy some of those illegal copies???
MEB
message to which previous responses had been placed:
> .. bumped a prior post thinking, perhaps, it meant something more than it
Since ."?"@m$.com apparently wishes to extend the usage of illegal
software into other forums in Australia, perhaps a specific search might
be in order to provide more wood to the fire:
http://www.google.com/search?q=Australian+software+piracy+laws
It should be noted, of course, that this party also uses the standard
"anonymous" news posting to attempt to hide their identity and activities...
Moreover, it should be further noted that the discussion proceeded into
another instituted by 98 Guy "MS WIN-98 SE (End User License Agreement)
Part 1 of 2" in microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion, in which the
actual OEM "general usage" licensing was placed and discussed, including
further discussion regarding bulk and special "seat" and related
licensing and disposal agreements [pursuant this segment of the long
discussion of legal and illegal usage and factors which apply] were also
extended.
98 Guy
> I talked to a MVP is the windows xp. New Oems can be sold with
> hardware. So, That means my Windows 98se, I bought is
> perfectly legal (That was going to be installed on my other computer.
> Never was because it quit.) However, it now makes me eligible to
> you windows xp upgrade.
Do you suffer from a mental deficit? Did someone hit you over the head
with a two by four just before you typed that? Or were you doing drugs?
When you're able to compose coherent english sentences, come back and
give that one more try.
Otherwise, stop trying to immitate MEB's style of conversational usenet.
MEB
Layoff 98Guy, this party was concerned that usage might be illegal,
even though supplied early on in the discussion to proceed with the XP
Upgrade path.
This was just the attempt to clarify with the explanation provided
elsewhere to Greg relating that issue.
Go back to your rock...
Buffalo
MEB wrote:
> Yep, just as the music CIVIL prosecutions make the news, so do the
> MAJOR criminal prosecutions. Sorry doesn't mean anything,, keep
> looking.
>
> So did you by some of those illegal copies???
Do you sleep at night or just think about being right?
Hopefully it is the first!
Damn, why is being theoretically right so damn important to you?
Perhaps you need to re-evalueate.
Buffalo
98 Guy
> I was defending you. These are not my words. These are a MVP
> words.
If you were quoting what an MVP said, and quoting him exactly, then
where did the MVP post that material?
It is extremely poorly written, grammatically speaking.
> Let me see if I can explain this.
>
> New windows Oems operating system (Except Vista and w7) can be
> sold with Hardware.
A better way to say that:
New computers that have some version of windows pre-installed on them
will have what's known as an "OEM" version. OEM versions of Windows are
(according to their license terms) limited to be used only on the
original computer hardware that was purchased by an end-user. Microsoft
defines "computer hardware" to be the motherboard of the computer. Any
or all other components can change, but the motherboard can not be
changed, as that would constitute a new or different computer. If the
original motherboard fails, then Microsoft does allow the motherboard to
be replaced *by an exact duplicate* without violating the Windows OEM
license.
> Used Oems operating systems can not be sold at all.
OEM copies (or licenses) of Windows are sold to mass-market system
builders at a large discount for incorporation into new computers. The
trade-off for the low cost is that the end-user can't transfer the
license to another computer, or sell that license to someone else. The
end-user can only sell the entire computer to someone else, and they
must not retain any copy of the OS (assuming such a copy came with the
computer when it was originally purchased).
So the end user is "not supposed to" sell their OEM copy of windows, or
use the OEM license or product key to install Windows on another
computer. Whether or not someone can actually do that if they really
wanted to - is another question.
> New Oems can be installed on any computer.
The use of the term "New Oem" needs clarification. There are *specific*
types of Windows licenses or products that can be installed on "any
computer". Strictly speaking, most people are aware of (and actually
have) an OEM version that can't be "installed on any computer".
For most people, the version of Windows that could be installed on any
computer is known as the "Retail" version. There is yet another type of
Windows - known as a "System Builder" version, that is somewhere between
a Retail and OEM version. The System Builder version is a form or type
of OEM version, but it has not yet been installed on any computer.
Small-scale computer builders buy the System Builder version and can
install it on ONE computer. Once it's installed on that ONE computer,
it can't be separated from the computer and re-sold by itself by the
end-user.
> Oems are tied to the computer once they are installed,
> stay with the computer, not necessarily the person or
> business.
That is true, as explained above.
> (MEB, I am not talking about large companies or big
> businesses.)
Meb thinks that all licenses are either volume or developer, and he
argues from that point of view.
> MVP, Are assigned by Microsoft. So they should know what
> they are talking about.
MVP's are appologists and psycophants for Microsoft. They derive their
living by supplying technical services to people to fix their
Microsoft-related problems. They have a vested interest in the
complexities, idiosyncracies, vulnerabilities and other problems that
are built into various Microsoft products. MVP's are largely not
critical of Microsoft's business practices or their products - in fact
they depend on Microsoft's forced obsolesence model and they promote
upgrading their clients to the latest versions of Microsoft products as
they become available, knowing that their clients will encounter new
problems migrating to the new versions, thereby insuring their continued
employment.
Jeff Richards
The only issue you need to determine is whether or not you have a qualifying
product for an upgrade version of XP. It's possible that your copy of W98SE
is perfectly legal but not usable as a qualifying product for the upgrade to
XP. Please note:
1. You only need a qualifying version of W98 if you are using the upgrade
version of XP. You cannot use the upgrade version of XP (either as a fresh
install or as an upgrade of an existing install) if you cannot provide
evidence of a qualifying product. Generally, an OEM version of W98 is not a
qualifying product. You haven't indicated whether your version of W98 is
full retail, OEM, or something else. Without knowing that, it's not
possible to confirm whether or not it will be a qualifying product for an
upgrade version of XP.
2. If your new copy of XP is not the upgrade version - that is, it is a full
retail or an OEM version - then your W98 copy is not relevant. You will not
be asked to demonstrate that you already have a qualifying product.
It's not clear from your post whether you have now determined that your W98
or your new copy of XP is the OEM version. But if you have now determined
that your W98 is an OEM version, then trying to use it as a qualifying
product for the Upgrade version of XP will probably not work
If the advice you got was to purchase an OEM version of XP (even if you have
to buy some nominal item of hardware) then you can follow that advice and
you need not be concerned about your W98.
--
Jeff Richards
MS MVP (Windows - Shell/User)
"Greg" <inv...@invalid.net> wrote in message
news:7i4vpiF...@mid.individual.net...
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:16:59 -0400, MEB <MEB-n...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> snip <
Jeff Richards
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 20:09:35 -0400, 98 Guy <9...@Guy.com> wrote:
>
> snip <
Some of that information is wrong.
> New windows Oems operating system (Except Vista and w7) can be sold
> with Hardware.
For W98, the OEM re-seller's agreement with MS allows them to provide the
software only as part of a software/hardware package (_must_ be sold with
hardware, not _can_).
> Used Oems operating systems can not be sold at all.
A system (hardware and software) can be transferred (either as a gift or as
a sale) provided that the conditions set out in the EULA are met. Roughly,
this means that the whole package (software, hardware, documents etc) as
originally purchased is transferred and no part of the package is retained.
In some specific cases (eg, US Government purchases) there is legislation or
other agreements woth MS that modify this requirement somewhat, but not in
any significant way.
> New Oems can be installed on any computer.
If you mean that the re-seller (the organisation that has an OEM agreement
with MS) can package the OEM software with any computer they sell, that's
correct. But when that package is sold the software is then tied to the
computer with which it was originally packaged. This creates a bit of a
problem where the re-seller has stretched the original rule somewhat and the
software was provided with hardware on which it could not actually be
installed, or hardware that is only part of a system (such as a disk drive).
In this case, the presumption is that the software can be installed only on
a machine where the hardware is used (but considering that the OEM re-seller
was probably acting outside his agreement with MS anyway, it's only a guess
as to what the real rule is).
> Oems are tied to the
> computer once they are installed, stay with the computer, not
> necessarily the person or business.
OEM software is tied to the computer it was sold with. That package can be
sold and transferred under conditions set out in the EULA, as mentioned
above.
There are two important things you need to be aware of about OEM software
1. If a vendor is selling it without hardware, they are in breach of their
agreement with MS. This doesn't worry you as the purchaser _except_ that it
might indicate that it's not actually an OEM copy at all, or that the dealer
might not be authorised to deal in OEM software. For instance, the vendor
might be providing a single key for every copy that he sells because MS has
cancelled his OEM agreement and has stopped roviding new product keys, and
this creates a risk (for some operating systems) that MS will not validate
it.
2. OEM copies are generally not usable as a 'qualifying product' for
upgrades. This has been mentioned elsewhere, and is the only point that is
relevant to your current problem of whether or not you can purchse the
upgrade version of XP istead of the full version. If your W98 copy is OEM,
you probably cannot use it as a qualifying product for the upgrade version
of XP.
MEB
NO, there is no LEGAL question involved, the authorization has already
been defined.
>
>> New Oems can be installed on any computer.
>
> The use of the term "New Oem" needs clarification. There are *specific*
> types of Windows licenses or products that can be installed on "any
> computer". Strictly speaking, most people are aware of (and actually
> have) an OEM version that can't be "installed on any computer".
ANY *OTHER* COMPUTER than which the disk/OS came with.
>
> For most people, the version of Windows that could be installed on any
> computer is known as the "Retail" version. There is yet another type of
> Windows - known as a "System Builder" version, that is somewhere between
> a Retail and OEM version. The System Builder version is a form or type
> of OEM version, but it has not yet been installed on any computer.
> Small-scale computer builders buy the System Builder version and can
> install it on ONE computer. Once it's installed on that ONE computer,
> it can't be separated from the computer and re-sold by itself by the
> end-user.
That is not necessarily true. That would depend upon the licensing
agreement which that builder held. They would have been authorized to
build more than one system [bulk purchase/volume licensing]. The
builders licensing and software would not be transferable.
Most small builders would likely have used retail products on a per
system basis.
OEM System Builder Licensing
https://partner.microsoft.com/UK/40012170
OEM System Builder Licensing
http://oem.microsoft.com/script/ContentPage.aspx?pageid=552816
Transfer of OEM Licenses
http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentPage.aspx?pageid=552861
Licensing for Hobbyists
http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841
Other usage or questions?
{caution the lines may wrap, copy to a text editor and remove the
wrapping from the text}
Find End User License Terms for Microsoft Software Licensed by Microsoft
or the Computer Manufacturer
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/useterms/
Campus Agreement Special Use Rights
http://www.microsoft.com/education/license/manage/caspecialuserights.aspx
Licensing options for education institutions
http://www.microsoft.com/education/license/howtobuy/options.aspx
note the license terms. times, seats, etc..
Microsoft® Open Value for Government - PDF
https://partner.microsoft.com/download/US/40099090
Microsoft Helps Protect Consumers by Tackling Illegal Software Sales
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/may08/05-05SoftwareSalesPR.mspx?rss_fdn=Press%20Releases
Education push from Microsoft drives rogue traders to turn over a new...
... and selling improperly licensed software to ... viruses and identity
theft when they use ...
http://download.microsoft.com/documents/uk/licensing/homeuser/illegal-traders/E_South%20West_Plymouth%20-%20SPC%20Computers,%20February%202009.pdf
Did you come across an unfamiliar term while validating your software or
while searching for other information? Use the Glossary to find
definitions of common terms used on the Genuine Microsoft Software Web
site.
http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/selfhelp/Glossary.aspx?displaylang=en&sGuid=080756ae-8b40-4e43-9033-82f8711ac943&alphabetID=p
Since this was originally a question regarding WGA and XP and upgrades.
Did You Get "...May Be a Victim of Software Counterfeiting" Notice on
Your Brand Name Computer? Look Here First!
http://social.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/genuinewindowsxp/thread/eca93de7-6126-41a4-ae1e-bab18a91cf04
>
>> Oems are tied to the computer once they are installed,
>> stay with the computer, not necessarily the person or
>> business.
>
> That is true, as explained above.
>
>> (MEB, I am not talking about large companies or big
>> businesses.)
>
> Meb thinks that all licenses are either volume or developer, and he
> argues from that point of view.
You know damn well that's is a *deliberately* false statement. WE, you
and I, have discussed retail versions, OEM, other licensing, and
transfers previously and repeatedly.
>
>> MVP, Are assigned by Microsoft. So they should know what
>> they are talking about.
>
> MVP's are appologists and psycophants for Microsoft. They derive their
> living by supplying technical services to people to fix their
> Microsoft-related problems. They have a vested interest in the
> complexities, idiosyncracies, vulnerabilities and other problems that
> are built into various Microsoft products. MVP's are largely not
> critical of Microsoft's business practices or their products - in fact
> they depend on Microsoft's forced obsolesence model and they promote
> upgrading their clients to the latest versions of Microsoft products as
> they become available, knowing that their clients will encounter new
> problems migrating to the new versions, thereby insuring their continued
> employment.
And you are a pure unadulterated lier and person attempting to
legitimize criminal activity [though apparently not openly now] as you
have repeatedly posted here and elsewhere.
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/fedsat/copyright.htm
http://peoplescounsel.org/reg/gen/windows/software-piracy-win98.thm
Had you spent some time in this forum, rather than the interloper you
are, you would KNOW that *this group* and its regulars, worked to
*extract* 9X from the hardware and other like activities, some of the
MVPs included, for over 10 years... you, on the other hand, have SHOUTED
TO THE WORLD, to steal the software...
Additionally, had you been in this group during those years, you would
also know the MVPs had also voiced numerous dislikes at various issues
concerning Microsoft, at times, discussing those issues DIRECTLY with
Microsoft.
Moreover, do you have ANY idea of the number of MVPs still using XP
rather than VISTA or even Windows7, and how they continue to attempt to
get extensions *for* XP FROM Microsoft, which XP users MAY receive the
benefit of.
Get a life, just do it somewhere else. Now crawl back under your rock...
MEB
Sorry, what do you expect when someone suggests TO ME or in this group
that piracy is somehow legitimate, and which *may* place others "in
harms way" of a prosecution somewhere on this planet?
Is it that you DON'T understand that those parties may end up in prison
or worse... not every place on this planet has a legal system like you
or I may have the benefit of...
Is it that you fail to understand, these LEGAL discussion issues are
NEVER extended unless someone attempts to LEGITIMIZE some form of
illegal usage.
Is it that you have forgotten that even "I" have directed to 9X
purchase potentials, though to retail versions... or provided basic
search links...
Did you ever visit the site linked below or is it that you just don't
you understand...
MEB
> MEB wrote:
>
>> Had you spent some time in this forum,
>
Oh sorry, multi-cross - microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
>
>> Moreover, do you have ANY idea of the number of MVPs still using XP
>> rather than VISTA or even Windows7,
>
> Wow, that's kinda stupid. 7 blows away XP. Surely you meant they're
> pissing their pants in excitement?
>
> A.
Well, I admit, its been awhile since I spent any time reviewing
Windows7. I have recently seen references to 7ISTA, which doesn't appear
to be an explosion of excitement being voiced...
MEB
Andy wrote:
Ah, Microsoft runs *filters* here {so do many of the transfer points},
your post didn't make it...
> MEB wrote:
>
>> Andy wrote:
>>> MEB wrote:
>>>
>>>> Had you spent some time in this forum,
>>> Which forum in particular are you talking about?
>> Oh sorry, multi-cross - microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
>
> **** ** Win 98? People still run that steaming pile?
Of course. There's still users of DOS, Win3.1, old Linux versions, you
name it, people get used to something, it becomes part of their life.
That is, after all, what this forum is for, to help the 9X users. Its
still a functional OS, its just about to find itself without much in the
way of AV or other protections. No one in that area seems to be paying
much attention to it for that type of activity.
>
>>>> Moreover, do you have ANY idea of the number of MVPs still using XP
>>>> rather than VISTA or even Windows7,
>>> Wow, that's kinda stupid. 7 blows away XP. Surely you meant they're
>>> pissing their pants in excitement?
>>>
>>> A.
>> Well, I admit, its been awhile since I spent any time reviewing
>> Windows7. I have recently seen references to 7ISTA, which doesn't appear
>> to be an explosion of excitement being voiced...
>
> Odd. I'd only expect those types of comments to be coming from people
> who have never used it. Oh well.
>
> Andy.
Yeah, seems its hard to please Windows users, of course it is a large
investment to use the new OSs... OH and that wasn't from MVPs but
testers and other users [at least not specifically]...
But you're apparently using Linux anyway...
Rod Speed
> Greg <inv...@invalid.net> wrote
>> 98 Guy <9...@Guy.com> wrote
> Some of that information is wrong.
We'll see...
>> New windows Oems operating system (Except Vista and w7) can be sold with Hardware.
> For W98, the OEM re-seller's agreement with MS allows them to provide the software only as part of a software/
> hardware package (_must_ be sold with hardware, not _can_).
Irrelevant to whether the end user that
ends up with one has a legal copy or not.
THAT individual never ever signed any purported 'agreement'
>> Used Oems operating systems can not be sold at all.
Wrong. They can in this country, essentially because MS does not write australian law.
> A system (hardware and software) can be transferred (either as a gift or as a sale) provided that the conditions set
> out in the EULA are met.
Doesnt have to comply with the conditions set out in the
EULA, ALL that has to do is comply with Australian law.
> Roughly, this means that the whole package (software, hardware, documents etc) as originally purchased is transferred
> and no part of the package is retained.
Completely irrelevant to what Australian law allows.
> In some specific cases (eg, US Government purchases) there is legislation or other agreements woth MS that modify this
> requirement somewhat, but not in any significant way.
That last is just plain wrong with Australian law.
>> New Oems can be installed on any computer.
> If you mean that the re-seller (the organisation that has an OEM agreement with MS) can package the OEM software with
> any computer they sell, that's correct.
Just as true of an end user that has paid for a legal copy of an
OEM or has been given one by a legal owner of one, etc etc etc.
> But when that package is sold the software is then tied to the computer with which it was originally packaged.
Wrong, and it doesnt have to have been bought with a computer either.
> This creates a bit of a problem where the re-seller has stretched the original rule somewhat and the software was
> provided
> with hardware on which it could not actually be installed,
Nope, no problem whatever except for MS.
> or hardware that is only part of a system (such as a disk drive).
Nope, no problem whatever except for MS.
> In this case, the presumption is that the software can be installed only on a machine where the hardware is used
Presumptions are completely irrelevant to Australian law.
> (but considering that the OEM re-seller was probably acting outside his agreement with MS anyway, it's only a guess as
> to what the real rule is).
That's MS's problem, not the individual that owns it.
>> Oems are tied to the computer once they are installed, stay with the computer, not necessarily the person or
>> business.
Wrong.
> OEM software is tied to the computer it was sold with.
Wrong.
> That package can be sold and transferred under conditions set out in the EULA, as mentioned above.
The EULA is completely irrelevant. What matters is Australian
law and there is no provision what so ever under Australian
law that ties any OS to any particular hardware.
> There are two important things you need to be aware of about OEM software
Wrong again. What matters is Australian law.
> 1. If a vendor is selling it without hardware, they are in breach of their agreement with MS.
That's the reseller's problem.
> This doesn't worry you as the purchaser _except_ that it might indicate that it's not actually an OEM copy at all,
Like hell it does.
> or that the dealer might not be authorised to deal in OEM software.
Irrelevant to the legal rights of the individual that owns it.
> For instance, the vendor might be providing a single key for every copy that he sells because MS has cancelled his OEM
> agreement and has stopped roviding new product keys, and this creates
> a risk (for some operating systems) that MS will not validate it.
Doesnt matter a damn if its being used for an upgrade.
> 2. OEM copies are generally not usable as a 'qualifying product' for upgrades.
Wrong.
> This has been mentioned elsewhere, and is the only point that is relevant to your current problem of whether or not
> you can
> purchse the upgrade version of XP istead of the full version.
In practice it works fine and is legally fine too.
> If your W98 copy is OEM, you probably cannot use it as a qualifying product for the upgrade version of XP.
Wrong.
MEB
> MEB wrote:
>
>> Andy wrote:
>>
>> Ah, Microsoft runs *filters* here {so do many of the transfer points},
>> your post didn't make it...
>
> their server, makes no difference to the majority (people who are
> actually using usenet, not Microsoft's dumbed down web based forums).
No here, on the master for the forum via NNTP.
>
>> Yeah, seems its hard to please Windows users, of course it is a large
>> investment to use the new OSs... OH and that wasn't from MVPs but
>> testers and other users [at least not specifically]...
>>
>> But you're apparently using Linux anyway...
>
> Yes, along with 2000, XP, Windows 7, Server 2003, Server 2008, OSX,
> Solaris...
>
> A.
So which do you actually use the most, you just a collector?
What's the point?
Lewis K. Zeelastik
Back in the late 1990s heaps of US Ebay customers were selling MS Office 97
Professional. They were selling them on Dutch auctions and usually had large
numbers available. Anyway, I bid on and won six copies. They were all sealed
and came with the installation licence number (or whatever you call it). I
loaded one onto my machine and it worked fine. I then advertised the other
five copies in the local newspaper. About a week or so later I was raided by
about six or seven police officers. They seized the five copies and said
they would contact me later (I had told them where and when I bought them
and that hundred of people were selling them and buying them and that to my
knowledge they were genuine original copies). About a year went by and then
I was summoned to appear in the magistrate's court. To cut a long story
short, the Magistrate dismissed the case as being frivolous and time
wasting. The Magistrate said that any layman would just naturally assume
that they were genuine copies and that included him. This was after the MS
representative gave a long monologue about the lengthy in-depth training MS
staff underwent to spot "illegal/pirated copies of software". The MS rep
also said that even if the software was genuine, it would be classified as
being OEM and that it was against the law to sell OEM without the
accompanying equipment (computer I guess). The Magistrate smiled and said as
far as he was concerned, as long as the "OEM" software was legally obtained
it became the property of the buyer and he/she owned it and therefore, could
do what the heck they wanted with it. One of my arguments was how come Ebay
or MS didn't spot the (literally) hundreds of sellers of the supposedly
illegal/pirated/OEM software.
To my knowledge the software was legal and original and I guess OEM, as all
it consisted of was the disk in a sealed case with the installation key and
installation instructions.
I heard later that several other people went through what I did with the
same end result.
Amen!!
Sunny
"MEB" <MEB-n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23nRz5Tn...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Andy wrote:
>> MEB wrote:
>>
>>> Andy wrote:
>>>
>>> Ah, Microsoft runs *filters* here {so do many of the transfer
>>> points},
>>> your post didn't make it...
>>
>> "Here"? This is usenet. Microsoft can do what they damn well please
>> on
>> their server, makes no difference to the majority (people who are
>> actually using usenet, not Microsoft's dumbed down web based forums).
>
> No here, on the master for the forum via NNTP.
<snip>
Wrong, even Microsoft calls it a "newsgroup" as distinct from a web based
"forum"
There is no such thing as a "master" on Usenet.
No internet browser is required to access any news server.
MEB
Wrong, and WE did this before.
You sure aren't going to get the newsgroups without either a Internet
interfaced newsreader, or via direct download FROM the Internet or its
equivalent and some text based alternative... so your argument is
without basis, its still basically the web or the old style BBS
recovery. Or is it you think it just magically appears on your computer...
MEB
Yeah, that was then, this is now:
Patents and Computer Software Law
http://www.hazan.com.au/patentsandcomputersoftware.html
Intellectual Property Office
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/
Database right
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-otherprotect/c-databaseright.htm
Written works including software and databases
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-applies/c-literary.htm
Guide to offenses
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/crime/crime-resources/crime-offenceguide.htm
The Parallel Importation Bill increased the maximum fine for importation
of infringing goods from $60,500 to $71,500 for individuals and $302,500
to $357,500 for corporations.
http://www.bsaa.com.au/bsaaweb/main/index.php?pg=media_single&PID=19&ch_table=link7
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/INTGUIDE/LAW/Intelectuallaw.htm
http://wiki.media-culture.org.au/index.php/Software_Piracy_-Free_Trade_Agreement-_New_Copyright_Laws
It is a changing world, economies are suffering, governments need
money... magistrates won't be far behind.
Sunny
FWIW, in 1996 I bought an IBM Aptiva with Win95 as the OS.
I protested to Microsoft (OEM Division)that IBM had not supplied me with a
Win95 CD, but rather supplied a "recovery CD and a "Tools" CD with drivers
etc.
The recovery CD was pass word protected by IBM, so access to individual
files etc was not possible.
End result was that Microsoft sent me an OEM CD "Windows 95c" (which I
still have)
(From Usenet I obtained the three "passwords" that IBM used, but IBM's
attitude sucked, I notice they now supply CDs , not "recovery CDs)
As for reselling used PCs with Operating systems :
Just a couple from our local junk mail (there are many more)
www.thecomputermarket.com
www.renewit.com.au
Sunny
You are so pedantic, yet you don't seem to absorb the written word?
What part of my "No internet browser is required to access any news
server" don't you understand?
How about you jam your smartarse "you think it just magically appears on
your computer..."
where the sun don't shine.
MEB
What part of you're using an INTERNET BASED NEWSREADER addressing the
*SAME* forum don't you understand or do you think the messages just
magically appear in your reader...
They're both based upon a *web* application and both use the Internet..
The Microsoft WEB-FORUM is like any other closed private forum [even
requiring a user name and password] except for one thing, it allows the
newsgroups to post messages in it [or at least the forums still open to
the public in that fashion], at least for now... go to the *communities*
WEB area and review the filtered messages posted/pulled from newsgroups
AND those posted via the web interface in the FORUM. OR wait in your
newsreader, and you will find [or would have found were the forum topic
still actively pursued] messages posted *from* the web interface FORUM
apparently appear *magically* in your newsreader or rather would have to
be magical, following your arguments.
Like I said, we did this before and you were supplied with the history
and workings previously,,, end of this discussion.
Sunny
My "BROWSER" is not open or ACTIVE while I am sending this message on
Usenet, you goose.
MEB
NO but your web based newsreader IS, ya duck..
MEB
to all providers:
"MEB" <MEB-n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uNWhU7%23OKH...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Sunny wrote:
>> "MEB" <MEB-n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:eg%231Ma%23OKH...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Sunny wrote:
>>>> "MEB" <MEB-n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:OlzAU24O...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>> . wrote:
>>>>>> "MEB" <MEB-n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Not as directed by you
> So did you by some of those illegal copies???
Actually, it's none of your business.
Your true arrogant "know it all" persona comes across very clear in your
posts, that, coupled with your paranoid claims on your web site, that the
US Law makers are out t get you, explains you even further.
----
MEB RESPONSE:
Yeah right. So you didn't bother to actually read the materials did you.
----
IMHO if you stopped taking the "I am Holier than thou pills" and allowed
some common sense into your thinking.
---
MEB RESPONSE:
Common sense, huh, so I should be telling people to use illegal
software, copy CDs of the software and sell it?
-----
Your insults point to your narrow mindness as well e.g. :
"Of course we ALL already knew that you were a fool, and a criminal...
now go back to that rock where you crawled out from."
----
MEB RESPONSE:
98 Guy has repeatedly posted links to torrents of illegal software,
posted links to cracks, keys, and numerous other. I suppose you think
that is acceptable.
------
"Do I care what YOU believe? No.. You continue to proceed in a manner
similar to 98 Guy,,, apprised of what actually IS the Law, and the
DEFINING aspects which ARE relevant, you nonetheless, refuse to accept
it because it conflicts with what you WISH to occur."
" What I care about is what others are apprised of, and violating the Law
is not something I will condone or further."
Just who do you think you are with your arrogant "violating the Law
is not something I will condone or further." ?
----
MEB RESPONSE:
Who do you think I am? I not like you attempting to place users in the
position of potential prosecution. I not not others who may have
inadvertently informed parties of potentially illegal acts. And I'm
definitely not like 98 Guy who has deliberately attempt to further
software piracy.
I happen to be someone who cares that others might find themselves put
in a position they wouldn't be in had they actually been informed
PROPERLY. They can then make their own *informed* decision.
----
You have been proved wrong about selling computers with a Microsoft Op
System installed, live with it (or at least have the common decency to
admit your erred)
---
MEB RESPONSE:
Of course the materials were presented later, but they certainly would
have been posted had I known this Sunny post was here:
OEM System Builder Licensing
https://partner.microsoft.com/UK/40012170
OEM System Builder Licensing
http://oem.microsoft.com/script/ContentPage.aspx?pageid=552816
Transfer of OEM Licenses
http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentPage.aspx?pageid=552861
Licensing for Hobbyists
http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841
Other usage or questions?
{caution the lines may wrap, copy to a text editor and remove the
wrapping from the text}
Find End User License Terms for Microsoft Software Licensed by Microsoft
or the Computer Manufacturer
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/useterms/
Campus Agreement Special Use Rights
http://www.microsoft.com/education/license/manage/caspecialuserights.aspx
Licensing options for education institutions
http://www.microsoft.com/education/license/howtobuy/options.aspx
note the license terms. times, seats, etc..
Microsoft® Open Value for Government - PDF
https://partner.microsoft.com/download/US/40099090
Microsoft Helps Protect Consumers by Tackling Illegal Software Sales
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/may08/05-05SoftwareSalesPR.mspx?rss_fdn=Press%20Releases
Education push from Microsoft drives rogue traders to turn over a new...
.... and selling improperly licensed software to ... viruses and
identity theft when they use ...
http://download.microsoft.com/documents/uk/licensing/homeuser/illegal-traders/E_South%20West_Plymouth%20-%20SPC%20Computers,%20February%202009.pdf
Did you come across an unfamiliar term while validating your software or
while searching for other information? Use the Glossary to find
definitions of common terms used on the Genuine Microsoft Software Web
site.
http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/selfhelp/Glossary.aspx?displaylang=en&sGuid=080756ae-8b40-4e43-9033-82f8711ac943&alphabetID=p
Since this was originally a question regarding WGA and XP and upgrades.
Did You Get "...May Be a Victim of Software Counterfeiting" Notice on
Your Brand Name Computer? Look Here First!
http://social.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/genuinewindowsxp/thread/eca93de7-6126-41a4-ae1e-bab18a91cf04
----
And of course, the next set of information specific to Australia:
Patents and Computer Software Law
http://www.hazan.com.au/patentsandcomputersoftware.html
Intellectual Property Office
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/
Database right
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-otherprotect/c-databaseright.htm
Written works including software and databases
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-applies/c-literary.htm
Guide to offenses
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/crime/crime-resources/crime-offenceguide.htm
The Parallel Importation Bill increased the maximum fine for importation
of infringing goods from $60,500 to $71,500 for individuals and $302,500
to $357,500 for corporations.
http://www.bsaa.com.au/bsaaweb/main/index.php?pg=media_single&PID=19&ch_table=link7
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/INTGUIDE/LAW/Intelectuallaw.htm
http://wiki.media-culture.org.au/index.php/Software_Piracy_-Free_Trade_Agreement-_New_Copyright_Laws
--
J. P. Gilliver (John)
<inv...@invalid.net> writes:
[]
>MVP, Are assigned by Microsoft. So they should know what they are
>talking about.
Jeff Richards is an MVP, and from what I've seen here, does indeed know
what he's talking about.
MEB is also an MVP.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **
"Forget computers; it's hard enough getting humans to pass the Turing test."
- David Bedno
J. P. Gilliver (John)
>Sunny wrote:
>> "MEB" <MEB-n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23w3tGmn...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> Sunny wrote:
>>>> There is no such thing as a "master" on Usenet.
>>>> No internet browser is required to access any news server.
>>>>
[]
> What part of you're using an INTERNET BASED NEWSREADER addressing the
>*SAME* forum don't you understand or do you think the messages just
>magically appear in your reader...
> They're both based upon a *web* application and both use the Internet..
What exactly do you mean by "a web application" (or rather "a *web*
application")?
As used by most people, "the web" is that which was (more or less)
invented by (now Sir) Tim Berners-Lee, and involves "pages" designed in
HTML, and transferred by HTTP. Newsgroups require none of that.
I grant that some people these days use "the web" and "the internet"
interchangeably; Sunny was being more precise.
>The Microsoft WEB-FORUM is like any other closed private forum [even
Which Sunny (and most of the rest of us) is/are not using.
>requiring a user name and password] except for one thing, it allows the
>newsgroups to post messages in it [or at least the forums still open to
Newsgroups do not post, people do.
>the public in that fashion], at least for now... go to the *communities*
>WEB area and review the filtered messages posted/pulled from newsgroups
>AND those posted via the web interface in the FORUM. OR wait in your
I don't think most of us are the slightest bit interested in those
"areas" (or forums sorry FORUMs), whatever (and wherever) they are.
>newsreader, and you will find [or would have found were the forum topic
>still actively pursued] messages posted *from* the web interface FORUM
>apparently appear *magically* in your newsreader or rather would have to
>be magical, following your arguments.
>
> Like I said, we did this before and you were supplied with the history
>and workings previously,,, end of this discussion.
>
You can say "end" as much as you like.
Oldus Fartus
You are spoiling your arguments by using the terms *web* and *Internet*
interchangably. Think Internet as being a connection of multiple
networks and the WWW as being an application or protocol which runs on
top of the Internet, as does SMTP, NNTP, FTP and others.
--
Cheers
Oldus Fartus
98 Guy
> There are two important things you need to be aware of about OEM
> software
>
> 1. If a vendor is selling it without hardware, they are in breach
> of their agreement with MS.
The vendor in question may have no agreement with MS, so what then?
There may be no real violation in that situation. Assuming that the OEM
product is "real" (and not counterfeit or a cloned copy) and assuming
that it's product key has not yet been used, then there's no real
violation of "law" if a vendor sells it to an end user, and the end user
installs it on his computer. Only that last step, where the end user
must agree to the terms of the EULA, constitutes anything resembling a
binding legal contract between the end user and Microsoft.
Just because Microsoft might slap a sticker with the wording "Not for
retail sale" or "not for resale" or "For installation only by OEM's onto
new hardware" doesn't mean that law enforcement have a green light to
look for people violating those terms.
Microsoft might slap a sticker on their software that says "Not to be
used to access the websites Apple.com or Google.com". Does that mean
law enforcement, the police and courts can automatically investigate and
charge people for violating those terms, just because Microsoft wrote
them on the product packaging? Can laws be created that easily, just be
writing something somewhere?
If I rent a car, and the rental terms stipulate that I'm restricted from
driving the car to another state, and if I do, and if for some reason
I'm stopped by the police in that other state (maybe for speeding), will
the police also charge me for violating the terms of my rental contract?
When it comes to OEM licenses (the license that comes with your typical
mass-market PC), clearly Microsoft has negotiated the prices, delivery
and usage terms for those licenses with the computer maker. The intent
is that the computer maker is supposed to install the software and
attach the license to the computers as they come off the assembly line.
If the computer maker has determined that they have a surplus of those
licenses, and no recourse to return them to Microsoft for a full refund,
then it's understandable that those licences (and any associated
physical installation media) will find it's way to the outside world via
resellers and other agents. Microsoft has (in theory) legal recourse
against the computer maker for violating the original terms of the
purchase of those licenses, and the legal recourse would be a civil
matter (not criminal). Beyond that, I can't imagine that the police
have a legal basis to declare the licenses as "stolen", or have any
basis to lay a criminal charge against anyone caught with them or trying
to sell or buy them.