Cheapest XP

[Deleted User]

asininity wrote: »

If I build a system, then technically I'm a system builder. If I do a fresh install I'm refurbishing the system.

The whole point of Microsoft's announcement through it's Partnership Scheme is to ensure clarity what constitutes the terms in the license agreement so that people are under no illusion that they have a fully licensed product, when infact they may not.

Fact is, retailers shouldn't be selling OEM products to people without documented proof that they are eligible to use the product in accordance with the license terms.

isofa

asininity wrote: »

If I build a system, then technically I'm a system builder. If I do a fresh install I'm refurbishing the system.

You are not, unless you are registered with Microsoft as such or a MS Partner etc, and in general then supply end users with custom PCs. If you are a home user making a PC for your own use, you are not a System Builder in the sense of the MS licence.
If you do a fresh install, you certainly aren't a refurbisher.

asininity wrote: »

But really its down to the courts to decide if its open to misunderstanding.

These is no misunderstanding in this licence, the court would always rule in favour of MS. You are purchasing a piece of software aimed specifically at at resellers and builders, not end users.

asininity wrote: »

If M$ want to take me to court for putting an OEM copy of XP on my machine, they'd have to prove I broke the licence agreement, prove I knew I was breaking it, and that the licence agreement is infact legal in the UK which would defo be questionable.

If theres no criminal intent and I paid for the copy they'd not make much from me if any.

Technically breaching a licence in this way is no different from pirating the commercial version. There is clear intent from you, as you've demonstrated in your post above. Just because you paid for the OEM version makes no difference.

Obviously MS wouldn't take you to court, but when when you come to activate you may have an issue.

[Deleted User]

Barry_Scott wrote: »

I now realise the OP doesnt have the COA (my bad) but a OEM can be reinstalled by an end user unless they transfer to another machine, if they want to reinstall OEM themselves thats fine, or all the PC users with a partition containing an Image of OEM XP would be in violation of the licence, but ofcourse they already have the hardware but needless to say its an enforcement that falls over because and end user can reinstall the OS.

End users are bound by the terms of the EULA (End Users License Agreement), not the System Builders License. They are free to reinstall and activate on their own machine the software came with as many times as necessary throughout the lifetime of their machine. When they purchase a new machine they are unable to migrate the previous version across as this is prohibited under the EULA. Microsoft constitutes the motherboard to be the basis of the machine, and only replacement due to repair constitutes the ongoing eligibility for the OEM version to be used.

asininity

isofa wrote: »

These is no misunderstanding in this licence, the court would always rule in favour of MS. You are purchasing a piece of software aimed specifically at at resellers and builders, not end users.

Technically breaching a licence in this way is no different from pirating the commercial version. There is clear intent from you, as you've demonstrated in your post above. Just because you paid for the OEM version makes no difference.

Obviously MS wouldn't take you to court, but when when you come to activate you may have an issue.

Obviously there is a misunderstanding because if I'm going to buy something I'll get it as cheap as possible. OEM is cheaper so I buy that.

If I've paid for it I've not pirated it, and I have successfully activated every single one of my OEM installs. I've even reinstalled on a different machine with no problems.

Theres no warning on the sites I've gone to when buying them stating I'm not allowed to buy them so these sites are also liable.

I didn't know about all this before reading this post so therefore had no intent except to get the cheapest price. M$ would need to prove intent, I'm innocent until proven guilty not the other way around.

There is confusion, the courts need to decide. Neither the EULA's or any of these licences have been tested in court so until they are the point is moot.

spakkker

This thread was clearly started on the wrong site. It has almost degraded into the "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" argument, used by religious despots, but in this case microsoft and bill gates don't quite have the authority of former popes. And, of course, all of us know that you can d/l XP with SP3, or even vista ultimate, which are pre-cracked, don't even need a serial, and update ok.

Pie123

. And, of course, all of us know that you can d/l XP with SP3, or even vista ultimate, which are pre-cracked, don't even need a serial, and update ok.

Can you do that? i did not know

asininity

Pie123 wrote: »

Can you do that? i did not know

You can yes but technically its not legal.

[Deleted User]

asininity wrote: »

You can yes but technically its not legal.

It hardly comes down to a technicality, it's illegal pure and simple.

Pie123

Back to linux i feel. Not paying stupid prices for Xp even though it is old.