From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Tue Apr 17 00:51:58 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA22899 for slug-politics-track29; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 00:51:58 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA22896 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 00:51:57 -0400 Received: from quillandmouse.com (tamqfl1-ar4-076-029.dsl.gtei.net [4.41.76.29]) by cloven.nks.net with ESMTP id AAA16042 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 00:58:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from paulf by quillandmouse.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14pMZb-0007OH-00 for slug-politics@nks.net; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 23:54:39 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 23:54:39 -0400 From: Paul M Foster To: slug-politics@nks.net Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] FW: Explaining the benefits of Linux Message-ID: <20010416235439.A27692@quillandmouse.com> References: <000001c0c6e5$29c71fe0$01010101@spock.tampabay.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <000001c0c6e5$29c71fe0$01010101@spock.tampabay.rr.com>; from jtribble@tampabay.rr.com on Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 10:21:51PM -0400 Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 10:21:51PM -0400, Dennis Tribble wrote: > > I went to a jobsite where I was asked to upgrade the motherboard and cpu in > a pc running OEM version of MS Windows. When I told them they would also > have to purchase a new license for Windows they said I was crazy and asked > me to leave. > Um, I'm not sure why they need to get a new Windows license. Presumably they already have a license for the copy they're using. I wasn't aware that normal Windows licenses were that restrictive. I would assume that if Windows woke up with the same hard drive but a different cpu, it would ponder a bit and adjust itself. I haven't read the license, but I assume that it says the user has the right to use _this_ copy of Windows on their machine (regardless of whether it's OEM or not). Paul From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Tue Apr 17 01:07:22 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA23061 for slug-politics-track29; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 01:07:22 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA23058 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 01:07:22 -0400 Received: from smtp014.mail.yahoo.com (smtp014.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.58]) by cloven.nks.net with SMTP id BAA16190 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 01:14:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 653268hfc141.tampabay.rr.com (HELO yahoo.com) (65.32.68.141) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 17 Apr 2001 05:07:20 -0000 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <3ADBCF04.90396D6B@yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 01:05:09 -0400 From: Norbert Cartagena X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-4GB i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: slug-politics@nks.net Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] FW: Explaining the benefits of Linux References: <000001c0c6e5$29c71fe0$01010101@spock.tampabay.rr.com> <20010416235439.A27692@quillandmouse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net Paul M Foster wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 10:21:51PM -0400, Dennis Tribble wrote: > > > > > I went to a jobsite where I was asked to upgrade the motherboard and cpu in > > a pc running OEM version of MS Windows. When I told them they would also > > have to purchase a new license for Windows they said I was crazy and asked > > me to leave. > > > > Um, I'm not sure why they need to get a new Windows license. Presumably > they already have a license for the copy they're using. I wasn't aware > that normal Windows licenses were that restrictive. I would assume that > if Windows woke up with the same hard drive but a different cpu, it > would ponder a bit and adjust itself. I haven't read the license, but I > assume that it says the user has the right to use _this_ copy of Windows > on their machine (regardless of whether it's OEM or not). > > Paul But woudldn't it be considered a new machine if they got a new motherboard AND processor, ergo neding a new licence for Windows? I mean, that's how I thought it worked. The license does not pertain to the owner and his rights, but rather to the ability of the owner to put it on one and only one machine (if you read the license carefully you also notice that technically you don't OWN the software, you merely rent it for a one time fee of $xxx.xx (at least pre-"We've caught you in the .NET")). Technically a functional computer consists of a motherboard, processor and RAM. Keyboard, video card and monitor make it semi-useful, a hard drive and disk drives make it fully functional for presonal use and everything else is just details. This is why it's technically illegal to sell your old copy of Windows when oyu decide that GNU/Linux (or *BSD if you're a hardcore massochist) is the way to go. By the way, shouldn't this conversation (at least the main question) be in the regular list? I mean, you could probably get more sources and.... hey, Ed's not on Politics, is he? Ed, you got any links for this? ;) *hee hee hee* Norb _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Tue Apr 17 18:50:48 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA00921 for slug-politics-track29; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:50:48 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA00918 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:50:48 -0400 Received: from quillandmouse.com (tamqfl1-ar4-076-029.dsl.gtei.net [4.41.76.29]) by cloven.nks.net with ESMTP id SAA24357 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:57:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from paulf by quillandmouse.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14pdPp-0007ab-00 for slug-politics@nks.net; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:53:41 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 17:53:41 -0400 From: Paul M Foster To: slug-politics@nks.net Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] FW: Explaining the benefits of Linux Message-ID: <20010417175341.B28440@quillandmouse.com> References: <000001c0c6e5$29c71fe0$01010101@spock.tampabay.rr.com> <20010416235439.A27692@quillandmouse.com> <3ADBCF04.90396D6B@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <3ADBCF04.90396D6B@yahoo.com>; from niccademous@yahoo.com on Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 01:05:09AM -0400 Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 01:05:09AM -0400, Norbert Cartagena wrote: > Paul M Foster wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 10:21:51PM -0400, Dennis Tribble wrote: > > > > > > > > I went to a jobsite where I was asked to upgrade the motherboard and cpu in > > > a pc running OEM version of MS Windows. When I told them they would also > > > have to purchase a new license for Windows they said I was crazy and asked > > > me to leave. > > > > > > > Um, I'm not sure why they need to get a new Windows license. Presumably > > they already have a license for the copy they're using. I wasn't aware > > that normal Windows licenses were that restrictive. I would assume that > > if Windows woke up with the same hard drive but a different cpu, it > > would ponder a bit and adjust itself. I haven't read the license, but I > > assume that it says the user has the right to use _this_ copy of Windows > > on their machine (regardless of whether it's OEM or not). > > > > Paul > > > But woudldn't it be considered a new machine if they got a new > motherboard AND processor, ergo neding a new licence for Windows? I > mean, that's how I thought it worked. The license does not pertain to > the owner and his rights, but rather to the ability of the owner to put > it on one and only one machine (if you read the license carefully you > also notice that technically you don't OWN the software, you merely rent > it for a one time fee of $xxx.xx (at least pre-"We've caught you in the > .NET")). Technically a functional computer consists of a motherboard, > processor and RAM. Keyboard, video card and monitor make it semi-useful, > a hard drive and disk drives make it fully functional for presonal use > and everything else is just details. This is why it's technically > illegal to sell your old copy of Windows when oyu decide that GNU/Linux > (or *BSD if you're a hardcore massochist) is the way to go. > Yeah, but when does your computer become not your computer? If I change out a display card, is it a new computer? I'll bet the Microsoft license doesn't spell this out. It probably only says you can run the software on _one_ computer. Which will be the case if you change out the MB. > By the way, shouldn't this conversation (at least the main question) be > in the regular list? I mean, you could probably get more sources and.... > hey, Ed's not on Politics, is he? Ed, you got any links for this? ;) > *hee hee hee* > Well, it could have been a volatile issue, though it doesn't seem to have turned out that way. I think Ed avoids politics. I think it's too contentious for him. Paul From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Tue Apr 17 22:32:11 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA02098 for slug-politics-track29; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:32:11 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA02095 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:32:11 -0400 Received: from smtp-server2.tampabay.rr.com (smtp-server2.tampabay.rr.com [65.32.1.39]) by cloven.nks.net with ESMTP id WAA25286 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:39:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from spock (242665hfc179.tampabay.rr.com [24.26.65.179]) by smtp-server2.tampabay.rr.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f3I2W8N21410 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:32:09 -0400 (EDT) From: "Da Weight" To: Subject: RE: [SLUG-POL] FW: Explaining the benefits of Linux Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:24:27 -0400 Message-ID: <000001c0c7ae$b0d59c40$01010101@spock.tampabay.rr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010417175341.B28440@quillandmouse.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net I originally posted the message to the main list, but it didn't appear so I assume the filter ate it. I had hoped that if Paul didn't have the answer he would put it on the main list for me. Microsoft is (deliberately I think) very vague about this, but if you dig deep enough you can find it on the OEM system builder pages (from which I am now banned). You won't get your answer by calling 1-800-areulegit or BSA or SPA. All any of them is interested in is obtaining the names of people or businesses to threaten or sue. You will get nothing from piracy@microsoft.com but automated responses telling you to call 1-800-areulegit. By Microsoft's definition a computer becomes a new computer when you upgrade the motherboard. You can upgrade any other part or parts. In my example I mentioned motherboard and cpu because in the real world the only reason to upgrade a motherboard is to enable you to upgrade something else, such as a faster cpu, more memory or new kind of bus for that fancy new video card (I suppose one could upgrade a motherboard solely for better (larger, faster) onboard cache, but I think that's a stretch). Any Microsoft OEM licenses sold bundled with a new computer legally follow the motherboard ultimately right to the landfill or incinerator. All of this applies only to the OEM license. Full retail versions can be transferred, but cost about twice as much. You can also get an "Open License" but these must be registered with Microsoft and are subject to periodic audit. The example I gave was deliberately simplified in attempt to accomplish a specific objective. The reality is that this company hired me to perform a Y2K audit and develop a remediation plan. In the course of this I discovered that in spite of shelling out many thousands of dollars, following the advise of a fully qualified (certified) consultant, making all of their purchases from a large well known commercial retailer and doing all of it in good faith with never the slightest thought of cheating or cutting corners, all of their Microsoft software was legally worthless. When I told them this they were stunned and at first did not believe it. It was difficult and stressful. Ultimately they decided to buy all new licenses because they wanted the problem solved immediately and since they qualified for the Microsoft Open License for Charities program the hit was only a few thousand dollars instead of the tens of thousands a for-profit corporation would have had to pay. They have agreed to let me set up a Linux server and workstation to test and evaluate as a potential replacement for Microsoft so they never have to go through this sort of thing again. I am of course real excited about this, I've lurked on the slug list (with few and far between comments) and dabbled with Linux on my little home network for a couple years now, this is my first chance to put it in practice in the real world. You will most certainly be seeing more of me with questions and pleas for help. Yes, some of you can tell I am using Windows. It is still easier for me to get stuff done, primarily supporting Windows users if I use Windows (The Linux version of VNC, for example, really sucks compared to the Windows version). For a while I had 10 partitions on this hard drive multi-boot with four different Linux distributions and Windows, all more or less working. It wasn't stable though and eventually crashed. Ok, I tire. I repeat my original request for help finding some links to web sites that explain, in lay-person terms, the limitations imposed by Microsoft's licensing terms, so that I can say to potential future converts "Hey, don't take my word for it, go to such and such site and read all about it for yourself." > -----Original Message----- > From: slug-politics@nks.net [mailto:slug-politics@nks.net]On Behalf Of > Paul M Foster > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 5:54 PM > To: slug-politics@nks.net > Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] FW: Explaining the benefits of Linux > > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 01:05:09AM -0400, Norbert Cartagena wrote: > > > Paul M Foster wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 10:21:51PM -0400, Dennis Tribble wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I went to a jobsite where I was asked to upgrade the > motherboard and cpu in > > > > a pc running OEM version of MS Windows. When I told them > they would also > > > > have to purchase a new license for Windows they said I was > crazy and asked > > > > me to leave. > > > > > > > > > > Um, I'm not sure why they need to get a new Windows license. > Presumably > > > they already have a license for the copy they're using. I wasn't aware > > > that normal Windows licenses were that restrictive. I would > assume that > > > if Windows woke up with the same hard drive but a different cpu, it > > > would ponder a bit and adjust itself. I haven't read the > license, but I > > > assume that it says the user has the right to use _this_ copy > of Windows > > > on their machine (regardless of whether it's OEM or not). > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > But woudldn't it be considered a new machine if they got a new > > motherboard AND processor, ergo neding a new licence for Windows? I > > mean, that's how I thought it worked. The license does not pertain to > > the owner and his rights, but rather to the ability of the owner to put > > it on one and only one machine (if you read the license carefully you > > also notice that technically you don't OWN the software, you merely rent > > it for a one time fee of $xxx.xx (at least pre-"We've caught you in the > > .NET")). Technically a functional computer consists of a motherboard, > > processor and RAM. Keyboard, video card and monitor make it semi-useful, > > a hard drive and disk drives make it fully functional for presonal use > > and everything else is just details. This is why it's technically > > illegal to sell your old copy of Windows when oyu decide that GNU/Linux > > (or *BSD if you're a hardcore massochist) is the way to go. > > > > Yeah, but when does your computer become not your computer? If I change > out a display card, is it a new computer? I'll bet the Microsoft license > doesn't spell this out. It probably only says you can run the software > on _one_ computer. Which will be the case if you change out the MB. > > > By the way, shouldn't this conversation (at least the main question) be > > in the regular list? I mean, you could probably get more sources and.... > > hey, Ed's not on Politics, is he? Ed, you got any links for this? ;) > > *hee hee hee* > > > > Well, it could have been a volatile issue, though it doesn't seem to > have turned out that way. > > I think Ed avoids politics. I think it's too contentious for him. > > Paul > > From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Tue Apr 17 23:05:59 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA02566 for slug-politics-track29; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 23:05:59 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA02563 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 23:05:59 -0400 Received: from smtp013.mail.yahoo.com (smtp013.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.57]) by cloven.nks.net with SMTP id XAA25478 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 23:13:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 653268hfc226.tampabay.rr.com (HELO yahoo.com) (65.32.68.226) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Apr 2001 03:05:57 -0000 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <3ADD040B.DAE90207@yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 23:03:39 -0400 From: Norbert Cartagena X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-4GB i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: slug-politics@nks.net Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] FW: Explaining the benefits of Linux References: <000001c0c7ae$b0d59c40$01010101@spock.tampabay.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net Try these. Sorry I wasn't more clear before. http://www.opensource.org/advocacy/case_for_customers.html http://www.opensource.org/advocacy/case_for_business.html http://www.opensource.org/advocacy/case_studies.html The entire page is full of WAY useful info, so you might wanna serf it fir a while. Norb _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Wed Apr 18 00:17:45 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA03051 for slug-politics-track29; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:17:45 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA03048 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:17:45 -0400 Received: from quillandmouse.com (tamqfl1-ar4-076-029.dsl.gtei.net [4.41.76.29]) by cloven.nks.net with ESMTP id AAA25792 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 00:24:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from paulf by quillandmouse.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14piWI-0007eK-00 for slug-politics@nks.net; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 23:20:42 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 23:20:42 -0400 From: Paul M Foster To: slug-politics@nks.net Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] FW: Explaining the benefits of Linux Message-ID: <20010417232042.C29233@quillandmouse.com> References: <20010417175341.B28440@quillandmouse.com> <000001c0c7ae$b0d59c40$01010101@spock.tampabay.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <000001c0c7ae$b0d59c40$01010101@spock.tampabay.rr.com>; from daweight@tampabay.rr.com on Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 10:24:27PM -0400 Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 10:24:27PM -0400, Da Weight wrote: > I originally posted the message to the main list, but it didn't appear so I > assume the filter ate it. I had hoped that if Paul didn't have the answer he > would put it on the main list for me. Don't know why it didn't show up on the list. Maybe HTML? The filters on the current (NKS) list are less stringent than they were with Owl River, so fewer things would bounce, I imagine. > Microsoft is (deliberately I think) > very vague about this, but if you dig deep enough you can find it on the OEM > system builder pages (from which I am now banned). You won't get your > answer by calling 1-800-areulegit or BSA or SPA. All any of them is > interested in is obtaining the names of people or businesses to threaten or > sue. You will get nothing from piracy@microsoft.com but automated responses > telling you to call 1-800-areulegit. By Microsoft's definition a computer > becomes a new computer when you upgrade the motherboard. You can upgrade > any other part or parts. In my example I mentioned motherboard and cpu > because in the real world the only reason to upgrade a motherboard is to > enable you to upgrade something else, such as a faster cpu, more memory or > new kind of bus for that fancy new video card (I suppose one could upgrade a > motherboard solely for better (larger, faster) onboard cache, but I think > that's a stretch). Any Microsoft OEM licenses sold bundled with a new > computer legally follow the motherboard ultimately right to the landfill or > incinerator. All of this applies only to the OEM license. This is the license Microsoft has with the OEM, or the license the user has with Microsoft? I'm assuming from your comments that you've researched this fully, and so your interpretation is correct. And although you're probably technically correct about how Microsoft views it, it may be that in the real world Microsoft/BSA don't want the headache of trying to make a case like this stick. Imagine that someone got OEM Windows on 25 machines, changed MBs on all machines, and maintained their OEM Windows copies on those same machines. I can imagine that if BSA came knocking on their door, they wouldn't want to prosecute the case, given the horrible press it would create. This is a far cry from twenty identical copies of Windows and one set of CD-ROMs for them. Aside from which, there's a key for each Windows CD-ROM that's undoubtedly unique for each copy that the OEM sends out. If you can prove that this machine's copy is from this CD-ROM, it's hard to make a case, no matter what the license actually says. Another point here is that you're probably the only person in the Tampa Bay area who's aware of this little wrinkle. So how many disgruntled ex-employees are going to call BSA about it? My point is that there is the strictly legal and then there is the maybe-not-strictly-legal-but-reasonable-and-unenforceable. You handled it in the strictly legal way, which is the safest. Your client can't complain much, if you've completely covered their asses. > Ok, I tire. I repeat my original request for help finding some links to web > sites that explain, in lay-person terms, the limitations imposed by > Microsoft's licensing terms, so that I can say to potential future converts > "Hey, don't take my word for it, go to such and such site and read all about > it for yourself." You're probably on the wrong list for that kind of info. I don't know how many people here follow the intricacies of Microsoft's byzantine licenses. OTOH, I don't think your final explanation was all that bad. OEM Windows licenses define a computer essentially as a motherboard. The license goes with the original motherboard. Get rid of that, and your license to that software is null and void. Will your customers buy that? Probably not. In fact, it probably won't be easy no matter how you explain it, because it's too incredible to believe. So I'd explain it, and then hand them a copy of the OEM license and tell them to have their lawyers look it over if they don't believe you. Then explain to them the consequences if a disgruntled ex-employee (or consultant!) decides to turn them in. Paul From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Wed Apr 18 05:17:39 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id FAA05294 for slug-politics-track29; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 05:17:39 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id FAA05291 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 05:17:38 -0400 Received: from smtp-server2.tampabay.rr.com (smtp-server2.cfl.rr.com [65.32.2.69] (may be forged)) by cloven.nks.net with ESMTP id FAA27626 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 05:24:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from spock (242665hfc179.tampabay.rr.com [24.26.65.179]) by smtp-server2.tampabay.rr.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f3I9HaN05520 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 05:17:36 -0400 (EDT) From: "Da Weight" To: Subject: RE: [SLUG-POL] FW: Explaining the benefits of Linux Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 05:17:15 -0400 Message-ID: <000001c0c7e8$5c0140e0$01010101@spock.tampabay.rr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010417232042.C29233@quillandmouse.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net > -----Original Message----- > From: slug-politics@nks.net [mailto:slug-politics@nks.net]On Behalf Of > Paul M Foster > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 11:21 PM > To: slug-politics@nks.net > Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] FW: Explaining the benefits of Linux > > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 10:24:27PM -0400, Da Weight wrote: > > > I originally posted the message to the main list, but it didn't > appear so I > > assume the filter ate it. I had hoped that if Paul didn't have > the answer he > > would put it on the main list for me. > > Don't know why it didn't show up on the list. Maybe HTML? The filters on > the current (NKS) list are less stringent than they were with Owl River, > so fewer things would bounce, I imagine. doh! I posted it to owlriver. I will attempt to post the original to the main list. > > Microsoft is (deliberately I think) > > very vague about this, but if you dig deep enough you can find > it on the OEM > > system builder pages (from which I am now banned). You won't get your > > answer by calling 1-800-areulegit or BSA or SPA. All any of them is > > interested in is obtaining the names of people or businesses to > threaten or > > sue. You will get nothing from piracy@microsoft.com but > automated responses > > telling you to call 1-800-areulegit. By Microsoft's definition > a computer > > becomes a new computer when you upgrade the motherboard. You > can upgrade > > any other part or parts. In my example I mentioned motherboard and cpu > > because in the real world the only reason to upgrade a motherboard is to > > enable you to upgrade something else, such as a faster cpu, > more memory or > > new kind of bus for that fancy new video card (I suppose one > could upgrade a > > motherboard solely for better (larger, faster) onboard cache, > but I think > > that's a stretch). Any Microsoft OEM licenses sold bundled with a new > > computer legally follow the motherboard ultimately right to the > landfill or > > incinerator. All of this applies only to the OEM license. > > This is the license Microsoft has with the OEM, or the license the user > has with Microsoft? I'm assuming from your comments that you've > researched this fully, and so your interpretation is correct. And > although you're probably technically correct about how Microsoft views > it, it may be that in the real world Microsoft/BSA don't want the > headache of trying to make a case like this stick. Imagine that someone > got OEM Windows on 25 machines, changed MBs on all machines, and > maintained their OEM Windows copies on those same machines. I can > imagine that if BSA came knocking on their door, they wouldn't want to > prosecute the case, given the horrible press it would create. They would not have to take it to court, as far as I know all cases so far have been settled out of court. > This is a > far cry from twenty identical copies of Windows and one set of CD-ROMs > for them. Aside from which, there's a key for each Windows CD-ROM that's > undoubtedly unique for each copy that the OEM sends out. If you can > prove that this machine's copy is from this CD-ROM, it's hard to make a > case, no matter what the license actually says. > > Another point here is that you're probably the only person in the Tampa > Bay area who's aware of this little wrinkle. So how many disgruntled > ex-employees are going to call BSA about it? You and Norb know now, and it will spread exponentially. > > My point is that there is the strictly legal and then there is the > maybe-not-strictly-legal-but-reasonable-and-unenforceable. You handled > it in the strictly legal way, which is the safest. Your client can't > complain much, if you've completely covered their asses. > This particular client does not want to hide behind any "maybe-not-strictly-legal-but-reasonable-and-unenforceable", they want to be strictly legal. I have researched this aspect as well. While many companies have been threatened, very few lawsuits have actually been filed for this type of "violation". Microsoft usually gives you 30 days to "get legal" and most companies just do it. Most of Microsoft's piracy lawsuits involve companies who are selling counterfeit copies outright or selling pre-installed systems without proper licensing and continue to do so after being warned. I have personal knowledge of one company that settled out of court for $250,000 (yes that's 1/4 million) because they upgraded about 100 boxen and just assumed that their MS OEM licenses would still be good. For some reason they thought that disassembling and throwing the old boxen in the dumpster, rather than donating them to charity, was important, but it was not to BSA. I have not been able to find any case where "illegal motherboard upgrading" has actually been tested in court. I'd sure like to read about it, not be part of it. BTW, if BSA gets a tip. they just file suit. You don't get a grace period. Again, so far as I can determine, every case so far has been settled out of court for between 10 and 250 thousand dollars. > > > > Ok, I tire. I repeat my original request for help finding some > links to web > > sites that explain, in lay-person terms, the limitations imposed by > > Microsoft's licensing terms, so that I can say to potential > future converts > > "Hey, don't take my word for it, go to such and such site and > read all about > > it for yourself." > > You're probably on the wrong list for that kind of info. I don't know > how many people here follow the intricacies of Microsoft's byzantine > licenses. > I know I am on the right list. Most of the people here are free thinkers, not the case on any MS list! > OTOH, I don't think your final explanation was all that bad. OEM Windows > licenses define a computer essentially as a motherboard. The license > goes with the original motherboard. Get rid of that, and your license to > that software is null and void. Will your customers buy that? Probably > not. In fact, it probably won't be easy no matter how you explain it, > because it's too incredible to believe. So I'd explain it, and then hand > them a copy of the OEM license and tell them to have their lawyers look > it over if they don't believe you. Then explain to them the consequences > if a disgruntled ex-employee (or consultant!) decides to turn them in. > We do not want to cause harm to the client, we want to educate (and, hopefully, sell additional services to) them. Dennis > Paul > > From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Sun Apr 22 14:13:15 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA20035 for slug-politics-track29; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 14:13:15 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA20032 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 14:13:14 -0400 Received: from quillandmouse.com (tamqfl1-ar4-076-029.dsl.gtei.net [4.41.76.29]) by cloven.nks.net with ESMTP id OAA03078 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 14:20:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from paulf by quillandmouse.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14rNUA-0001v4-00 for slug-politics@nks.net; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 13:17:22 -0400 Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 13:17:22 -0400 From: Paul M Foster To: slug-politics@nks.net Subject: [SLUG-POL] Reply and test Message-ID: <20010422131722.A7375@quillandmouse.com> References: <200104221739.NAA02924@cloven.nks.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <200104221739.NAA02924@cloven.nks.net>; from MAILER-DAEMON@cloven.nks.net on Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 01:39:30PM -0400 Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net (Something's funky here with the Reply-To's, I think, so this is a test. And a reply.) > Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 13:26:07 -0400 > From: Norbert Cartagena > Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] PETA (continued) > > Yeah, if you're one of those crazies that also doesn't mind having > arsenic in your water supply. And actually, cows and chickens are fed > the leftover parts of other cows and chickens (yup, forced cannibalism), > which is what spreads Mad Cow, for example. Arsenic: What does eating chickens and cows have to do with arsenic in the water supply? Also, the arsenic levels are _not_ as bad as they are made out to be by the environmentalist wackos. Repeat after me: junk science. Cannibalism: Your statement gives the impression that this is all or even a majority of what cows and chickens are fed. Not true. The "forced cannibalism" comment also implies that cows and chickens feel bad about this. They don't. This is anthropomorphizing animals, and serves mainly to engender sympathy for them, but has no place in serious arguments. It's true that body parts do find their way into animal feed. This is a byproduct of large-scale animal feed processing. It could and should be lessened, you are correct. I've heard a lot of junk science about mad cow. Apparently, the agent responsible is essentially a protein. But proteins do not self-replicate. So I'm not sure this isn't a bogus claim. Paul > > > > > > >From another list ... in a humorous vein > > > > > > Vegetarian: An old Indian word meaning "Bad Hunter" > > > > > > ******************************* > > > Today's Health Tip > > > > > > Q: Should I cut down on meat and eat more fruits and vegetables? > > > > > > A: You must grasp logistical efficiencies. What does a cow eat? Hay and > > > corn. And what are these? Vegetables. So a steak is nothing more than an > > > efficient mechanism of delivering vegetables to your system. Need grain? > > > Eat chicken. Beef is also a good source of field grass (green leafy > > > vegetable). And a pork chop can give you 100% of your recommended daily > > > allowance of vegetable slop. > > > > > > * NOTE: This helpful advice was NOT brought to you by the taxpayer-funded > > > Health & Human Services Department of the federal government ... which is > > > why you should take it seriously. > > > From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Sun Apr 22 14:46:42 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA20111 for slug-politics-track29; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 14:46:42 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA20108 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 14:46:42 -0400 Received: from smtp012.mail.yahoo.com (smtp012.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.32]) by cloven.nks.net with SMTP id OAA03188 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 14:54:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 653268hfc42.tampabay.rr.com (HELO yahoo.com) (65.32.68.42) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Apr 2001 18:46:40 -0000 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <3AE325A3.48C6029@yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 14:40:35 -0400 From: Norbert Cartagena X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-4GB i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: slug-politics@nks.net Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] Reply and test References: <200104221739.NAA02924@cloven.nks.net> <20010422131722.A7375@quillandmouse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net Paul M Foster wrote: > > (Something's funky here with the Reply-To's, I think, so this is a test. > And a reply.) > > > Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 13:26:07 -0400 > > From: Norbert Cartagena > > Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] PETA (continued) > > > > Yeah, if you're one of those crazies that also doesn't mind having > > arsenic in your water supply. And actually, cows and chickens are fed > > the leftover parts of other cows and chickens (yup, forced cannibalism), > > which is what spreads Mad Cow, for example. > > Arsenic: What does eating chickens and cows have to do with arsenic in > the water supply? Also, the arsenic levels are _not_ as bad as they are > made out to be by the environmentalist wackos. Repeat after me: junk > science. > > Cannibalism: Your statement gives the impression that this is all or > even a majority of what cows and chickens are fed. Not true. The "forced > cannibalism" comment also implies that cows and chickens feel bad about > this. They don't. This is anthropomorphizing animals, and serves mainly > to engender sympathy for them, but has no place in serious arguments. > > It's true that body parts do find their way into animal feed. This is a > byproduct of large-scale animal feed processing. It could and should be > lessened, you are correct. > > I've heard a lot of junk science about mad cow. Apparently, the agent > responsible is essentially a protein. But proteins do not > self-replicate. So I'm not sure this isn't a bogus claim. > > Paul > You know, I could reply to this with enough evidence to spin you head, but right now I'm too busy with Finals (hey, I'm almost done with college, almost at the point of graduating Cum Laude, I don't wanna blow it). Can we put this off 'till about next Tuesday (week&1/2 from now)? By the way, anything about 5ppb (parts per billion) is too much. Norb _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Sun Apr 22 15:23:39 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA20251 for slug-politics-track29; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 15:23:39 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA20248 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 15:23:39 -0400 Received: from smtp017.mail.yahoo.com (smtp017.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.114]) by cloven.nks.net with SMTP id PAA03371 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 15:31:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 653268hfc42.tampabay.rr.com (HELO yahoo.com) (65.32.68.42) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Apr 2001 19:23:37 -0000 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <3AE32E3C.A061254@yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 15:17:16 -0400 From: Norbert Cartagena X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-4GB i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: slug-politics@nks.net Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] Reply and test References: <200104221739.NAA02924@cloven.nks.net> <20010422131722.A7375@quillandmouse.com> <3AE325A3.48C6029@yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net > > By the way, anything about 5ppb (parts per billion) is too much. > Errata -> "about" is supposed to be "above." (speaking of arsenic in the water supply). Sorry 'bout that. Norb _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Sun Apr 22 17:19:30 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA20483 for slug-politics-track29; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:19:30 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA20480 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:19:29 -0400 Received: from quillandmouse.com (tamqfl1-ar4-076-029.dsl.gtei.net [4.41.76.29]) by cloven.nks.net with ESMTP id RAA03738 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:27:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from paulf by quillandmouse.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14rQOR-0001xM-00 for slug-politics@nks.net; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 16:23:39 -0400 Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 16:23:39 -0400 From: Paul M Foster To: slug-politics@nks.net Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] Reply and test Message-ID: <20010422162339.A7404@quillandmouse.com> References: <200104221739.NAA02924@cloven.nks.net> <20010422131722.A7375@quillandmouse.com> <3AE325A3.48C6029@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <3AE325A3.48C6029@yahoo.com>; from niccademous@yahoo.com on Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 02:40:35PM -0400 Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 02:40:35PM -0400, Norbert Cartagena wrote: > Paul M Foster wrote: > > > > I've heard a lot of junk science about mad cow. Apparently, the agent > > responsible is essentially a protein. But proteins do not > > self-replicate. So I'm not sure this isn't a bogus claim. > > > > Paul > > > > You know, I could reply to this with enough evidence to spin you head, Oh sure, there's plenty of evidence. People come up with evidence every day for all kinds of things. But how is it that prions, which have no DNA, can reproduce? Unless you can show scientific evidence for that, then I'm not inclined to believe any other evidence. For all I know, prions are an artifact of some other unseen and hitherto undiagnosed agent. > but right now I'm too busy with Finals (hey, I'm almost done with > college, almost at the point of graduating Cum Laude, I don't wanna blow > it). Can we put this off 'till about next Tuesday (week&1/2 from now)? > Yeah sure, run away, ya sissy! ;-} (Good luck on finals. Your degree is in... ?) > By the way, anything about 5ppb (parts per billion) is too much. According to whom? Remember, these people doing this research are the same ones who gave us the "salt-is-bad-no-salt-is-good" and "eggs-are-bad-no-eggs-are-good" refrains. Paul From owner-slug-politics-track29@homer.mkintl.com Sun Apr 22 17:34:52 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA20513 for slug-politics-track29; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:34:52 -0400 Received: from cloven.nks.net (cloven-i-0.nks.net [192.168.1.252] (may be forged)) by homer.mkintl.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA20510 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:34:52 -0400 Received: from smtp012.mail.yahoo.com (smtp012.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.32]) by cloven.nks.net with SMTP id RAA03770 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:42:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 653268hfc42.tampabay.rr.com (HELO yahoo.com) (65.32.68.42) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Apr 2001 21:34:50 -0000 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <3AE34CC7.6D59A2FF@yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:27:35 -0400 From: Norbert Cartagena X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-4GB i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: slug-politics@nks.net Subject: Re: [SLUG-POL] Reply and test References: <200104221739.NAA02924@cloven.nks.net> <20010422131722.A7375@quillandmouse.com> <3AE325A3.48C6029@yahoo.com> <20010422162339.A7404@quillandmouse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: slug-politics@nks.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: slug-politics@nks.net > Yeah sure, run away, ya sissy! ;-} (Good luck on finals. Your degree is > in... ?) Music Composition _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com