Microsoft’s Windows Licensing - Why Can’t It Be Simplified ?
- 3
- Add a Comment
Microsoft’s Windows licensing, commonly referred to as the EULA, End User License Agreement , is a contention for debate in which the arguments are based on perception of what the license actually states. Written in legalese I would suspect that the United States Supreme Court would end up in a 5-4 decision on what it REALLY means.
What brought this once again to my attention, was a post in one of the forums in which the following question was asked. “Can I use The Original Dell License If I Swap Out Motherboards On A Dell System?” I’ll cover the highlights:
- Questioner has been given a Dell system with Windows License number affixed to case.
- He has a white box case with a compatible motherboard.
- He is going to swap all Parts from the Dell case - to white box case. i.e. cpu, ram, hard disk, CD, floppy drive[s].
In reading the post, the answers were split just about 50 - 50 between he could and he could not. This is fairly typical when a question about a EULA comes up and arguments usually erupt. But in this case it is fairly clear. The answer is NO!
Why? Because we are dealing with OEM software and not Retail software purchased by the user. Windows was preinstalled by Dell from the factory and thus is OEM. [See the link above from Micheal Steven's Site]
The exception here is “If the motherboard is replaced, the computer system is deemed “new” and a new license would be required.”
My point. Every situation in which a EULA is being applied, is different. And each situation must be examined separately. And I am no expert when it comes to these discussions since I usually do a Google for a correct interpretation by those who have studied this subject. Why? Because after reading many EULA’s I still can’t figure out what the lawyers are saying, or in most cases, not saying! 
[tags]microsoft, windows license, EULA, simplified, interpretation, [/tags]
3 Comments
Tim Hodkinson
January 23rd, 2007
at 11:29am
One thing I learned, much to my surprise, is that the EULA for Windows is not primarily about “owning” a copy of Windows, but rather, it’s about “using” a copy of Windows.
Many commercial applications grant you the right to use a copy of their particular program on one computer (via a registration key number). This is a common feature of many application EULAs and just like a copy of a book, it can be moved from one location to another or transferred (sold) to someone else, but not “copied”. But this is not a feature of the Windows EULA. With Windows you pay a fee to use Windows under very limited hardware conditions. It’s not like anything else I’ve ever encountered. It’s more like a complicated “contract” or commercial licensing agreement. My mistake has been assuming that I have “bought” a “copy” of Windows. I think this is why many people hate MS: users have expectations about what they can do with Windows based on completely mistaken assumptions about their licence. The Windows EULA grants users very little, and now it’s even less… and the Windows Genuine Advantage software has the power to enforce it.
Ron Schenone
January 23rd, 2007
at 11:42am
Hi Tim,
Absolutely correct.
CPU - Uttaruk.com » Microsoft’s Windows Licensing - Why Can’t It Be Simplified ?
January 24th, 2007
at 11:05am
[...] Original post by Lockergnome Nexus and software by Elliott Back [...]