«

In message <>, Rod Speed wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
>
>> will s wrote
>>
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
>
>>>> Microsoft doesn't allow you to install an OEM licence for your own
>>>> use, it has to be for an "unrelated" party. So you have to use a
>>>> full-price retail licence.
>
>>> so all my PC's dont work and I am not typing this because
>>> its on an OEM version and they dont work\\\bugger
>
>> So you've just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence
>> for your own use, in contravention of Microsoft's licensing terms?
>
> Nope, he never signed up for any purported 'licensing terms' with an OEM
> product.

If he never agreed to the licence, then he has no permission to use the
software, since the licence is the only thing giving such permission.

In message <>, The Old Bloke
wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 19:04:12 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <_zealand> wrote:
>
>>So youÂ’ve just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence for
>>your own use, in contravention of MicrosoftÂ’s licensing terms?
>
> Maybe you should read up on Aus law. MS Terms and Conditions do not
> override Aus law.

One basic universal fact of copyright is that you cannot have a copy of the
copyrighted item without permission (hence “copyright� = “right to copy�).
The licence is what gives that permission. So if you don’t abide by the
licence, then it doesn’t apply. Fine. Which means you have no permission.
Which means that your copy of the software is infringing copyright. QED.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
>>> will s wrote
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote

>>>>> Microsoft doesn't allow you to install an OEM licence for your own
>>>>> use, it has to be for an "unrelated" party. So you have to use a
>>>>> full-price retail licence.

>>>> so all my PC's dont work and I am not typing this because
>>>> its on an OEM version and they dont work\\\bugger

>>> So you've just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence
>>> for your own use, in contravention of Microsoft's licensing terms?

>> Nope, he never signed up for any purported 'licensing terms' with an OEM product.

> If he never agreed to the licence, then he has no permission to use
> the software, since the licence is the only thing giving such permission.

Wrong, as always. Its the retail sale that legally allows you to use the OS that you bought with the hardware.

And you are massively confusing the purported 'licence' conditions anyway.

With an OEM 'licence', thats between the operation that packages the PC
with PCs that are sold with an OS included, or with the operation that bought
the OEM OSs from Microsoft when a small operation assembles a PC from
parts and includes an OEM OS with the PC, not the end user.

You havent got a clue about even the most basic consumer law.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
> The Old Bloke wrote
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <_zealand> wrote

>>> So you’ve just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence
>>> for your own use, in contravention of Microsoft’s licensing terms?

>> Maybe you should read up on Aus law. MS Terms and Conditions do not override Aus law.

> One basic universal fact of copyright is that you cannot
> have a copy of the copyrighted item without permission

But the retail sale is what gives that permission.

> (hence "copyright" = "right to copy").

The retail sale is what gives that permission.

> The licence is what gives that permission.

Nope, the retail sale does. There is no 'licence' with most copyrighted
material like a book or a music CD or movie DVD etc etc etc.

> So if you don't abide by the licence, then it doesn't apply.

Wrong. With an OEM product, any purported agreement is between
MS and the assembler of the hardware, not the end user.

> Fine. Which means you have no permission.

Wrong, as always.

> Which means that your copy of the software is infringing copyright. QED.

Wrong, as always.

On 11/10/10 15:07, Another Me wrote:
> On 11/10/10 1:23 PM, Enkidu wrote:
>
>> Like adding 200 users for example? You can add them one by one in a GUI
>> but that can rapidly become less and less fun.
>
> You can add multiple users into a Windows Domain using the GUI, why
> would you do them one by one?
>
Because they are all different. Adding 200 users, setting passwords,
adding them to different OUs, giving them diffferent permissions, adding
them to different groups would take all day. I had some scripts built
around the 'addusers.exe' command and a spreadsheet to take the drudgery
out of it.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

The ends justifies the means - Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli.

The end excuses any evil - Sophocles

On 12/10/10 9:16 AM, Enkidu wrote:

> Because they are all different. Adding 200 users, setting passwords,
> adding them to different OUs, giving them diffferent permissions, adding
> them to different groups would take all day. I had some scripts built
> around the 'addusers.exe' command and a spreadsheet to take the drudgery
> out of it.


How is that any different than importing the spreadsheet into the
Windows side of things? Or are you justifying having to write some scripts?

On 12/10/10 09:25, Another Me wrote:
> On 12/10/10 9:16 AM, Enkidu wrote:
>
>> Because they are all different. Adding 200 users, setting
>> passwords, adding them to different OUs, giving them diffferent
>> permissions, adding them to different groups would take all day. I
>> had some scripts built around the 'addusers.exe' command and a
>> spreadsheet to take the drudgery out of it.
>
> How is that any different than importing the spreadsheet into the
> Windows side of things? Or are you justifying having to write some
> scripts?
>
Which version are you talking about? 2000 and 2003 didn't have that ability.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

The ends justifies the means - Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli.

The end excuses any evil - Sophocles

On 12/10/10 8:05 PM, Enkidu wrote:

> Which version are you talking about? 2000 and 2003 didn't have that
> ability.

I don't which version, I just remember when they moved to Windows
servers at a place I worked they imported all the users, OUs etc etc
from a spreadsheet.

Doing a search on batch windows users imports returns a lot of MS pages
on their free tools for doing so

In message <>, Rod Speed wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
>
>> The licence is what gives that permission.
>
> Nope, the retail sale does.

The retail sale commits nobody to anything. That’s why Microsoft’s licence
says if you don’t agree to the terms, you can take the software back to
where you obtained it for a full refund.

> There is no 'licence' with most copyrighted material like a book or a
> music CD or movie DVD etc etc etc.

In fact there is. It’s printed on the CD cover, inside the book, etc.

In message <>, The Old Bloke
wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 23:33:45 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <_zealand> wrote:
>
>>If he never agreed to the licence, then he has no permission to use the
>>software, since the licence is the only thing giving such permission.
>
> Easy to see that you have no legal training

Easy to see you have never heard a qualified lawyer discuss the subject
<http://lwn.net/Articles/61292/>.