Calling All Dimdows OEM Pirates

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 26, 2010.

  1. Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:

    Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses for
    the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    resold to another party.

    Microsoft has spoken.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 26, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Richard Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    > <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >
    > Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses for
    > the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    > intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    > resold to another party.
    >
    > Microsoft has spoken.


    Ok, so I can assemble and sell to the business, or vice versa - no big
    deal IMO.
    Richard, Apr 26, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. IN message <hr3pts$1nh$>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    > <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >
    > Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses for
    > the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    > intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    > resold to another party.
    >
    > Microsoft has spoken.



    This post will really & truly convince the do-it-yourself Windows user
    to switch to Linux.
    Lawrence D'Oublespeak, Apr 26, 2010
    #3
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 26/04/10 22:29, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    > <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >
    > Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses for
    > the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    > intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    > resold to another party.
    >
    > Microsoft has spoken.


    Yet another Microsoft corporate shill reposts his masters twaddle.
    victor, Apr 26, 2010
    #4
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 26/04/10 23:21, Richard wrote:
    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    >> <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >>
    >> Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses for
    >> the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    >> intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    >> resold to another party.
    >>
    >> Microsoft has spoken.

    >
    > Ok, so I can assemble and sell to the business, or vice versa - no big
    > deal IMO.


    And its got a COA so its not pirated according to Microsoft.
    victor, Apr 26, 2010
    #5
  6. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 27/04/10 00:50, Lawrence D'Oublespeak wrote:
    > IN message<hr3pts$1nh$>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    >> <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >>
    >> Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses for
    >> the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    >> intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    >> resold to another party.
    >>
    >> Microsoft has spoken.

    >
    >
    > This post will really& truly convince the do-it-yourself Windows user
    > to switch to Linux.


    Is there some obscure rule somewhere in Wintroll lore that says you
    can't run both ?
    victor, Apr 26, 2010
    #6
  7. In message <hr3t0l$f9g$>, Richard wrote:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    >> <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >>
    >> Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses for
    >> the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    >> intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    >> resold to another party.
    >>
    >> Microsoft has spoken.

    >
    > Ok, so I can assemble and sell to the business, or vice versa - no big
    > deal IMO.


    It’s got to be an “unrelated†party.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 27, 2010
    #7
  8. In message <hr4tu4$858$-september.org>, victor wrote:

    > And its got a COA so its not pirated according to Microsoft.


    BSA audits don’t accept COAs as proof of purchase. They want an invoice
    specifically itemizing the relevant software product(s), with your name as
    the purchaser.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 27, 2010
    #8
  9. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 27/04/10 12:09, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<hr4tu4$858$-september.org>, victor wrote:
    >
    >> And its got a COA so its not pirated according to Microsoft.

    >
    > BSA audits don’t accept COAs as proof of purchase. They want an invoice
    > specifically itemizing the relevant software product(s), with your name as
    > the purchaser.


    It meets the standard of authenticity defined by Microsoft as not being
    pirated software.
    You will have to find another word in your lexicon of inflammatory rhetoric.

    What would be the LEGAL consequences in NZ LAW for someone activating an
    OEM pack they bought and installed ?
    victor, Apr 27, 2010
    #9
  10. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 27/04/10 16:28, billsmith wrote:
    > On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 13:33:12 +1200, victor<> wrote:
    >
    >> On 27/04/10 12:09, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>> In message<hr4tu4$858$-september.org>, victor wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> And its got a COA so its not pirated according to Microsoft.
    >>>
    >>> BSA audits don’t accept COAs as proof of purchase. They want an invoice
    >>> specifically itemizing the relevant software product(s), with your name as
    >>> the purchaser.

    >>
    >> It meets the standard of authenticity defined by Microsoft as not being
    >> pirated software.
    >> You will have to find another word in your lexicon of inflammatory rhetoric.
    >>
    >> What would be the LEGAL consequences in NZ LAW for someone activating an
    >> OEM pack they bought and installed ?

    >
    >
    >
    > There is No More NZ LAW as we are to be taken over by the Yanks and this
    > Free Trade Thing..


    Still looks like the NZ Police driving round to me.
    They don't seem to be interested in OEM Windows 7 though.

    People will believe anything.
    victor, Apr 27, 2010
    #10
  11. In message <hr5esq$fo1$-september.org>, victor wrote:

    > On 27/04/10 12:09, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> In message<hr4tu4$858$-september.org>, victor wrote:
    >>
    >>> And its got a COA so its not pirated according to Microsoft.

    >>
    >> BSA audits don’t accept COAs as proof of purchase. They want an invoice
    >> specifically itemizing the relevant software product(s), with your name
    >> as the purchaser.

    >
    > It meets the standard of authenticity defined by Microsoft as not being
    > pirated software.


    But not that of the BSA.

    > What would be the LEGAL consequences in NZ LAW for someone activating an
    > OEM pack they bought and installed ?


    Ask a lawyer. If you can afford one.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 27, 2010
    #11
  12. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 27/04/10 19:19, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<hr5esq$fo1$-september.org>, victor wrote:
    >
    >> On 27/04/10 12:09, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>
    >>> In message<hr4tu4$858$-september.org>, victor wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> And its got a COA so its not pirated according to Microsoft.
    >>>
    >>> BSA audits don’t accept COAs as proof of purchase. They want an invoice
    >>> specifically itemizing the relevant software product(s), with your name
    >>> as the purchaser.

    >>
    >> It meets the standard of authenticity defined by Microsoft as not being
    >> pirated software.

    >
    > But not that of the BSA.
    >


    They do what they're told.

    Hobbyists aren't business software
    victor, Apr 27, 2010
    #12
  13. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    bok Guest

    On 27/04/2010 12:03 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<hr3t0l$f9g$>, Richard wrote:
    >
    >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>> Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    >>> <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >>>
    >>> Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses for
    >>> the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    >>> intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    >>> resold to another party.
    >>>
    >>> Microsoft has spoken.

    >>
    >> Ok, so I can assemble and sell to the business, or vice versa - no big
    >> deal IMO.

    >
    > It’s got to be an “unrelated†party.


    Not according to the actual license. You are quoting an *interpretation*
    of the OEM system builder licence. The latest version of the actual OEM
    licence uses the term 'third party' and not 'unrelated party'.
    bok, Apr 27, 2010
    #13
  14. In message <hr6ceo$ngv$-september.org>, bok wrote:

    > On 27/04/2010 12:03 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>
    >> In message<hr3t0l$f9g$>, Richard wrote:
    >>
    >>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    >>>> <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >>>>
    >>>> Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses
    >>>> for the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    >>>> intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    >>>> resold to another party.
    >>>>
    >>>> Microsoft has spoken.
    >>>
    >>> Ok, so I can assemble and sell to the business, or vice versa - no big
    >>> deal IMO.

    >>
    >> It’s got to be an “unrelated†party.

    >
    > Not according to the actual license. You are quoting an *interpretation*
    > of the OEM system builder licence.


    I am quoting Microsoft’s exact words, from the above page.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Apr 27, 2010
    #14
  15. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    bok Guest

    On 27/04/2010 10:01 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<hr6ceo$ngv$-september.org>, bok wrote:
    >
    >> On 27/04/2010 12:03 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>>
    >>> In message<hr3t0l$f9g$>, Richard wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    >>>>> <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses
    >>>>> for the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    >>>>> intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    >>>>> resold to another party.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Microsoft has spoken.
    >>>>
    >>>> Ok, so I can assemble and sell to the business, or vice versa - no big
    >>>> deal IMO.
    >>>
    >>> It’s got to be an “unrelated†party.

    >>
    >> Not according to the actual license. You are quoting an *interpretation*
    >> of the OEM system builder licence.

    >
    > I am quoting Microsoft’s exact words, from the above page.


    I know you were. It is an interpretation by a Microsoft employee.
    However, the fact remains that those words are not contained in the
    actual licence and therefore have no legal merit.
    bok, Apr 27, 2010
    #15
  16. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    bok Guest

    On 26/04/2010 10:29 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    > <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >
    > Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses for
    > the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    > intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    > resold to another party.
    >
    > Microsoft has spoken.


    Not so long ago, MS officially and quite unambiguously allowed hobbyists
    to use discounted OEM System Builder copies on new PCs built for
    personal use. Prior to the advent of Windows 7, the Microsoft OEM
    licence contained these words:

    "OEM system builder software packs are intended for PC and server
    manufacturers or assemblers ONLY. They are not intended for distribution
    to end users. Unless the end user is actually assembling his/her own PC,
    in which case, that end user is considered a system builder as well."
    bok, Apr 27, 2010
    #16
  17. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Richard Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > But not that of the BSA.


    An OEM licence affixed to a used system is valid as far as audits in NZ
    are concerned, no proof of purchase of that other than the machine.

    Hell, no proof of anything about the purchase of the machine, could be
    stolen for all the auditors knew.

    Please go back and find some more FUD to spread about it.
    Richard, Apr 27, 2010
    #17
  18. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Richard Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > It’s got to be an “unrelated†party.


    Is there a definition in their terms of unrelated party? No, ok sweet.
    Richard, Apr 27, 2010
    #18
  19. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    victor Guest

    On 27/04/10 22:01, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message<hr6ceo$ngv$-september.org>, bok wrote:
    >
    >> On 27/04/2010 12:03 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>>
    >>> In message<hr3t0l$f9g$>, Richard wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    >>>>> <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses
    >>>>> for the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    >>>>> intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    >>>>> resold to another party.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Microsoft has spoken.
    >>>>
    >>>> Ok, so I can assemble and sell to the business, or vice versa - no big
    >>>> deal IMO.
    >>>
    >>> It’s got to be an “unrelated†party.

    >>
    >> Not according to the actual license. You are quoting an *interpretation*
    >> of the OEM system builder licence.

    >
    > I am quoting Microsoft’s exact words, from the above page.



    As far as NZ hobbyists are concerned whoever they buy it from has to
    comply with the CGA, it doesn't matter who installs it, its been legally
    purchased, they can use it.
    Whoever sold it to them may have an insignificant breach of contract
    issue with Microsoft, but there is no infringement of copyright
    involved, and therefore no "OEM pirates".
    victor, Apr 27, 2010
    #19
  20. In message <hr5036$n8g$-september.org>, victor wrote:

    > On 27/04/10 00:50, Lawrence D'Oublespeak wrote:
    >> IN message<hr3pts$1nh$>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>
    >>> Remember, you don’t buy a Windows OEM licence for your own use. From
    >>> <http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?pageid=563841>:
    >>>
    >>> Microsoft retail software licenses are the appropriate licenses for
    >>> the do-it-yourself market. OEM System Builder software is not
    >>> intended for this use, unless the PC that is assembled is being
    >>> resold to another party.
    >>>
    >>> Microsoft has spoken.

    >>
    >> This post will really& truly convince the do-it-yourself Windows user
    >> to switch to Linux.

    >
    > Is there some obscure rule somewhere in Wintroll lore that says you
    > can't run both ?


    If a do-it-yourself user runs both, the original post will really and
    truly convince him/her to run only Linux.

    Or to pay for a Microsoft retail software license and shred the OEM license
    before the BSA police finds out.
    Lawrence D'Oublespeak, Apr 27, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?SmVyZW15IFdvbmcg6buD5rOT6YeP?=

    Request for a downgrade from x64 OEM license to 32-bit OEM license

    =?Utf-8?B?SmVyZW15IFdvbmcg6buD5rOT6YeP?=, Aug 23, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    58
    Views:
    2,658
    Cari \(MS-MVP\)
    Sep 23, 2005
  2. =?Utf-8?B?QW5keQ==?=

    Install XP Pro 32bit OEM on XP Pro 64bit OEM, and dual boot

    =?Utf-8?B?QW5keQ==?=, Oct 2, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    496
    VWWall
    Oct 4, 2005
  3. Au79
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    482
    sittingduck
    Oct 7, 2007
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Dimdows OEM Licence Piracy

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 5, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    1,122
    victor
    Nov 17, 2009
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Dimdows Malware Dwarfs All Others

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 15, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    290
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Sep 15, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page