new vista oem licence required after motherboard swap

[str]

This has never been the case, MS has nothing against this as long as you accept the system builder and EULA.

Burnsy

But according to the telephone activation questioning Microsoft do not make a distinction between a consumer who purchases the OEM version of Windows for personal use and a consumer who purchases Retail Windows for personal use.

I understand the license agreements are different but still Microsoft's questioning during activation or reactivation sort of suggests that system builders distribute to a consumer their newly built PC along with a preinstalled copy of the OEM version of Windows. Whereas consumers (or enthusiasts) who purchase their copy of the OEM version of Windows are in fact not system builders because our copy of Windows is not preinstalled on our PC. They purchased it seperately and installed it themselves.

Surely it's reasonable to accept that Microsoft's own questioning during activation suggests enthusiasts who purchase a copy of the OEM version of Windows to install on their PC are the same as enthusiasts who purchase a copy of the Retail version of Windows to install on their PC.

 

[Burnsy2023]

So what does he answer? if he says its came pre installed then hes lying, if he said he bought it in a retail shop he isnt. Yet surely the real answer to an OEM code inquiry would be that it came preinstalled!

But you did buy it from a retail reseller (doesn't mean it's a retail licence). So just speak the truth.

Burnsy

 

[Burnsy2023]

But according to the telephone activation questioning Microsoft do not make a distinction between a consumer who purchases the OEM version of Windows for personal use and a consumer who purchases Retail Windows for personal use.

I understand the license agreements are different but still Microsoft's questioning during activation or reactivation sort of suggests that system builders distribute to a consumer their newly built PC along with a preinstalled copy of the OEM version of Windows. Whereas consumers (or enthusiasts) who purchase their copy of the OEM version of Windows are in fact not system builders because our copy of Windows is not preinstalled on our PC. They purchased it seperately and installed it themselves.

Consumers who are not system builders cannot buy nor assign an OEM licence, they must buy retail. If the system builder does not distribute the machine there is no preinstallation requirement.

Burnsy

 

[AtreuS]

But you did buy it from a retail reseller (doesn't mean it's a retail licence). So just speak the truth.

Burnsy

I strongly suspect if you told the truth and said you bought it from a retail shop the system would flag you up as trying to con them, surely they system knows retail keys apart from oem keys? so there you are with an oem key trying to fool the system into thinking you have a retail version, if you see what i mean.

I just really think that the whole activation routine just hasnt been set up with our situation in mind. The possibilty that someone who isnt a system builder can go into a retail shop and buy a non retail copy of vista just hasnt been thought about.

Like i say ive not personally done may vista activations over the phone so i dont know how the system reacts to the answers you give. But i cant see how having a oem code and yet answering that you didnt get it preinstalled is going to make things easy on yourself.

I can certainly see why people do buy oem and just lie to the system to get it activated, after all there is no chance of any come-back is there!

 

[AtreuS]

Consumers who are not system builders cannot buy nor assign an OEM licence, they must buy retail.

Burnsy

Thats the problem though.. they CAN buy oem licence's and are non the wiser as to why they shouldnt be allowed to.

 

[str]

Why do some "retail shops" believe it is within our right to purchase a copy of the OEM version of Windows?

Remember that OcUK could easily be considered a "retail shop" and yet there is nothing in the product information on their website saying consumers who do not consider themselves to be system builders do not have the right to purchase a copy of this version of Windows.

 

[str]

I just really think that the whole activation routine just hasnt been set up with our situation in mind. The possibilty that someone who isnt a system builder can go into a retail shop and buy a non retail copy of vista just hasnt been thought about.

Exactly right!

In fact one of my friends purchased the OEM version of Windows and he didn't consider until it was too late that he needed the COA affixed to the outside of the wrapper. He had actually opened the wrapper and stuck it in the bin. He only kept the disk and the leaflet that comes with it.

It was only a few days later that he attempted to install that copy of Windows and it was only then he realised his mistake and he was unable to retrieve the COA because the bin had been emptied!

I suggested he telephone the shop he purchased it from but after a few attempts he realised they were not going to help so he contacted Microsoft and after explaining the situation the representative actually provided a product key for him to use over the telephone!

He told me that the representative was surprised he could purchase the OEM version of Windows so readily and he explained that he was told that buying a new hard drive meant he could also purchase the OEM copy of Windows.

That was a good while ago probably somewhere around 2 years so Microsoft is likely aware that consumers readily purchase the OEM version of Windows but I suspect they have not considered such actions from a legal perspective.

 

[AtreuS]

Exactly. I dont know about the shops near you but here in manchester if a joe off the street went into a pc shop and asked for vista he would be sold an OEM, no doubt about it. If they went into a HIGH STREET shop obviously only retail products would be sold but since they cost twice the price for no apprent, in the eyes of a normal joe, differance they would go with the non high street shop i bet.

Obviously the fault if any lies with the shops and not the customer. As far as the customer knows they paid inexcess of 50quid for a vista and they want to use it. In fact a friend of my partner bought a pc a while back and also wanted vista so the shop just sold her an oem copy as she said she knew someone who could put it on for her ( ie muggins here ).

 

[str]

I just had another thought would innocent until proven guilty be applicable?

 

[str]

Wow just found something very interesting regarding Microsoft's Windows Genuine Advantage:

NOTICE: THIS UPDATE FROM MICROSOFT WILL HELP YOU KNOW IF YOU ARE RUNNING A PROPERLY LICENSED, GENUINE COPY OF WINDOWS XP. SOME UPDATES AND OFFERS FROM MICROSOFT REQUIRE A GENUINE COPY OF WINDOWS XP.

INSTALLING THIS UPDATE IS OPTIONAL. THE UPDATE WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF YOUR WINDOWS XP SOFTWARE.

INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR SYSTEM (FOR EXAMPLE, YOUR WINDOWS PRODUCT KEY AND IP ADDRESS) WILL BE SENT TO MICROSOFT. MICROSOFT WILL NOT USE THE INFORMATION TO IDENTIFY OR CONTACT YOU.

Note that it says (licensed being the operative word):

PROPERLY LICENSED, GENUINE COPY OF WINDOWS XP

Is Microsoft's anti-piracy software allowing consumers like myself to find out that Microsoft believe my purchased, installed and activated copies of Windows XP are indeed properly licensed?

I have installed Windows Genuine Advantage on my purchased, installed and activated copies of Windows XP yet no problems were reported so is it reasonable to accept that I have properly licensed copies of Windows XP?

 

[str]

I would particularly appreciate hearing what Gareth (who has posted a few times on here already) thinks of the Windows Genuine Advantage info.

How about it, friend?

 

[gareth170]

I have learned (thanks to many posters in this thread) that when you agree to the OEM license agreement you are legally permitted to install and use your OEM copy of Windows as long as you do not break the terms of the license agreement.

If you do not agree with the OEM license agreement (and you surely will not agree when you want to install your used OEM copy of Windows on what Microsoft deems to be a new PC) legally you are not allowed to use it anymore and the only legal obligation available now is for you to return it for a refund.

wowwwww i see he understands it now

100% right

 

[str]

wowwwww i see he understands it now

Oh, Hi there Gareth.

EDIT: To be clear, I honestly had no idea Gareth (who I don't actually know) was about to post a comment on here at exactly the same time as I did yet he did which is uncanny!

 

[gareth170]

Oh, Hi there Gareth.

hi mate.

Oh, EDIT: To be clear, I honestly had no idea Gareth (who I don't actually know) was about to post a comment on here at exactly the same time as I did yet he did which is uncanny!

lol i guess we had the same though...

 

[gareth170]

Wow just found something very interesting regarding Microsoft's Windows Genuine Advantage:



Note that it says (licensed being the operative word):



Is Microsoft's anti-piracy software allowing consumers like myself to find out that Microsoft believe my purchased, installed and activated copies of Windows XP are indeed properly licensed?

I have installed Windows Genuine Advantage on my purchased, installed and activated copies of Windows XP yet no problems were reported so is it reasonable to accept that I have properly licensed copies of Windows XP?

Genuine copy of windows means a key and disk that microsoft provided, e.g not a copyed disk and not a fake key or a copy that as the activate disabled..

but licensed is different from Windows Genuine Advantage

NOTICE: THIS UPDATE FROM MICROSOFT WILL HELP YOU KNOW IF YOU ARE RUNNING A PROPERLY LICENSED, GENUINE COPY OF WINDOWS XP.

it should say PROPERLY LICENSED AND A GENUINE COPY OF WINDOWS XP. i guess the "," = and??

 

[Burnsy2023]

I just had another thought would innocent until proven guilty be applicable?

Nope, it's not criminal law.

Burnsy

 

[Burnsy2023]

Wow just found something very interesting regarding Microsoft's Windows Genuine Advantage:

It also says it will help you find out whether you are properly licensed. Nothing more. It does not say, if this program says you are licensed you are categorically fully licensed.

Burnsy

 

[Deluxe1]

I had my previous mobo for 4 months and had only used my oem vista on that,i got a new mobo today and low and behold it activated first time on a new mobo.

 

[gareth170]

I had my previous mobo for 4 months and had only used my oem vista on that,i got a new mobo today and low and behold it activated first time on a new mobo.

but you've broken your license agreemeant... yes it may well activate but it doesn't give u the right to use it..

many people think once its activated everything is fine... but it isn't.. activate and being licensed are different things...

would anyone break another license? e.g tv license...

 

[AtreuS]

but you've broken your license agreemeant... yes it may well activate but it doesn't give u the right to use it..

many people think once its activated everything is fine... but it isn't.. activate and being licensed are different things...

would anyone break another license? e.g tv license...

But we are suggesting that it is ok... because the clause that microsoft have put in the EULA is unfair, or more to the point we are "suggesting" it is unfair and until it is tested in a court of law its an unknown sitation as to wether its legally seen as unfair and hence unforceable.

Just as a shop cant put unfair terms in its T&C a company like MS cant just put any old terms in the EULA and expect them to be blindly followed and never questioned. Thats why rulings and precedent cases are important, to iron out stuff like this. But like has been said its very unlikely MS would want a case to actually goto court as it would cost them, be sensationalist and also they do stand a chance of actually losing. Its not beyond the realms of possibility for a court to decide that not allowing you to use your purchased vista on a single pc that you have upgraded is in fact not a fair clause.

So until its is actually judged on by a court from a legal point of view is the actual clause just an opinion by MS or a legally binding contract. I think the waters are a bit muddier than some would like to think.

Remember that under uk law terms in contracts that are deemed by a court to be unfair are not enforcable. If im wrong im wrong but im sure its something to that effect, so if the unfair clause is the only thing in contention as it is in this case then untill its been tested its an open question as to wether you are still licenced or not.