Vista OEM activation an license with new mobo's

[Hitman_Leon]

What components can I change in my system before I invalidate the OEM License?

There is a general consensus that the OEM license is paired with the motherboard. You can generally change any other component bar the case where the COA is attached. If you change the case, and the COA isn't physically attached, this breaks the terms of the EULA. Also, if you do buy a new OEM license, but don't attach the COA, the same applies, you are not licensed. If you change a significant amount of hardware you may be asked to reactivate, but this doesn’t mean that you are necessarily unlicensed. However, you can change the motherboard under a warranty claim if the motherboard was faulty. A warranty claim is defined as replacement of the original board from the company that your purchased it from, under a warranty scheme. You cannot simply buy yourself another board if there was a problem with your existing motherboard and still be fully licensed. If you are simply upgrading for feature or performance enhancements, you would need a new OS license.

In relation to the above I found the following on the MS forums,Link

Question

Let's say a person buys all the parts for his computer along with an OEM copy of Vista, then builds it himself.



Then later on decides to change the motherboard either because the original is no longer working or he wants/needs to upgrade.



Can he just re-activate his OEM Vista copy or will he need to buy a new one?



Thank you for your time.

Answer

If you purchase a "generic" OEM version of Windows Vista and reinstall it on a different motherboard, you'll need to "activate by phone".

2nd Answer

Yes, if you build the computer, you are seen as the 'Manufacturer'. The Licensing agreement says that "The replacement motherboard must be the same make/model or the same manufacturer’s replacement/equivalent, as defined by that manufacturer’s warranty." Since you are the 'Manufacturer' you can define your manufacturer’s warranty any way you wish in regards to 'manufacturer’s replacement/equivalent' motherboard.



Also, Carey is correct, you will need to Activate by Phone and talk to a Live Activation Rep.



Thank you,

Darin Smith

WGA Forum Manager

Looks odd considering all the other informtion available, but in essence if you arethe manufacturer you do dictate your own terms of warranty. Interesting stuff if it is right. And im probably months behind so this has probably been posted before.

 

[a1ex2001]

this has always worked for me in the past with XP OEM just ring them up say the mobo failed and type in the activation code they give you. I know a lot of people who have done the same with Vistas it's very difficult for Microsoft to argue with.

 

[stoofa]

As Burnsey I'm sure will also add - I have spoken to Microsoft about the licensing situation.
Part of my job as an IT Manager is to make sure that all of my equipment within the company is 100% license legal.
I cannot get this wrong or else we end up being fined a lot of money.

I have spoken to Microsoft directly on the situation with OEM Windows licenses.
Despite what you have been told from this other source, it is not the case.
The OEM license is tied to the motherboard the OS is originally installed on.
There is, written into this agreement, a part about hardware failure.
If your motherboard fails within warranty then you will usually be sent an exact replacement.
Even if you are sent another model of motherboard in warranty that swap is allowed.

If however you are simply upgrading or replacing an out of warranty faulty motherboard then your license is no longer valid as soon as the motherboard is replaced and a new OEM license wil be required.
This of course wouldn't be the case if you'd bought a Retail license - which allows for any number of moving between machines.

 

[stoofa]

this has always worked for me in the past with XP OEM just ring them up say the mobo failed and type in the activation code they give you. I know a lot of people who have done the same with Vistas it's very difficult for Microsoft to argue with.

And once again - what is legal and what is possible are two entirely different things.
Sure, phone up, claim it is a warranty replacement and 9 times out of 10 you'll get activation just fine.
What it does mean is that if it wasn't a warranty replacement you are then no more legal than somebody who downloaded their OS from a torrent site.

 

[Slam62]

And once again - what is legal and what is possible are two entirely different things.
Sure, phone up, claim it is a warranty replacement and 9 times out of 10 you'll get activation just fine.
What it does mean is that if it wasn't a warranty replacement you are then no more legal than somebody who downloaded their OS from a torrent site.

wake up and smell the coffee baby

 

[Lagmeister]

wake up and smell the coffee baby

And you need to think about what happens to a business user when they are discovered. Hint; Tea and Cakes are not served.

 

[Slam62]

And you need to think about what happens to a business user when they are discovered. Hint; Tea and Cakes are not served.

Well business is business man - too bad

 

[Tuvoc]

If however you are simply upgrading or replacing an out of warranty faulty motherboard then your license is no longer valid as soon as the motherboard is replaced and a new OEM license wil be required.
This of course wouldn't be the case if you'd bought a Retail license - which allows for any number of moving between machines.

Well, after 12 mths I removed my P5N-E SLI nvidia 650 chipset based board, and replaced it with an Intel P45 based ASUS P5Q Deluxe. My OEM copy of Vista Business x64 told me to re-activate after the change, and it re-activated perfectly straight over the internet. No phone call required to Microsoft, and certainly no new licence required.

 

[AWPC]

Replaced or changed 3 motherboards in the past 2 months and not once did MS ask me to phone them they reactivated over the net then when I bought a new HD they asked me to call which is strange but there you go.

Do not feel as though I am running 1 illegal copy.

Have 3 legitimate copies (2 x HP + 1 Ultimate) on 2 different PC's on different partitions & doubt very much there is a court on the planet who would ever convict me of any crime as MS allowed my motherboard swaps only 1 was faulty the others were replacements.

 

[Cobertizo]

Do not feel as though I am running 1 illegal copy.

Have 3 legitimate copies (2 x HP + 1 Ultimate) on 2 different PC's on different partitions & doubt very much there is a court on the planet who would ever convict me of any crime as MS allowed my motherboard swaps only 1 was faulty the others were replacements.

To be honest, there probably isn't a court on the planet who would convict you for running a couple of copies of Windows that you had downloaded, hacked and installed on our own PCs. It's not worth their time worrying about - far better to target businesses with thousands of installations, and check them out instead.

But that doesn't change the fact that if you contravening the EULA even very slightly, you are still technically unlicensed. And so in the end you are no better off than if you'd pirated the software. (And yes, MS does have more money than it might, but it's still losing out due to the purchase of a cheaper OEM version.)

As for the "manufacturer" theory in the initial post, I'm fairly sure that a system builder is not the same thing as a manufacturer. Dell isn't a manufacturer. Asus, on the other hand, would count (at least on the motherboard side). If you "manufactured" your own upgraded motherboard (get that soldering iron out!), then maybe you could get away with reusing the OEM version of Windows claiming it as a warranty replacement. But I don't see that happening...

I do wonder why OCUK doesn't sell more retail versions of Windows, considering how many of its forumites change their motherboards frequently, which would make a purchase of the retail version make much more financial sense. But that's probably a whole different conversation....

 

[stoofa]

Well, after 12 mths I removed my P5N-E SLI nvidia 650 chipset based board, and replaced it with an Intel P45 based ASUS P5Q Deluxe. My OEM copy of Vista Business x64 told me to re-activate after the change, and it re-activated perfectly straight over the internet. No phone call required to Microsoft, and certainly no new licence required.

Once again - there is a difference in what you can legally do and what you can physically do.
Although you might feel that you are nice and legal - you are not.
As I said above, you are currently no more legal than somebody who has downloaded a copy of their OS and hasn't paid a penny for it.

Harsh - but true.

 

[Tuvoc]

Once again - there is a difference in what you can legally do and what you can physically do.
Although you might feel that you are nice and legal - you are not.
As I said above, you are currently no more legal than somebody who has downloaded a copy of their OS and hasn't paid a penny for it.

Harsh - but true.

I disagree - if Microsoft invited me to reactivate, and *accepted* the re-activation, acepted the hardware change, then I'm fully legal. That's crystal clear. There is very often a difference between the strict legal situation and what a company does in practice. In practice, MS are ignoring the strict EULA and re-activating

 

[stoofa]

Replaced or changed 3 motherboards in the past 2 months and not once did MS ask me to phone them they reactivated over the net then when I bought a new HD they asked me to call which is strange but there you go.

Do not feel as though I am running 1 illegal copy.

Have 3 legitimate copies (2 x HP + 1 Ultimate) on 2 different PC's on different partitions & doubt very much there is a court on the planet who would ever convict me of any crime as MS allowed my motherboard swaps only 1 was faulty the others were replacements.

It is totally up to you if you "feel" you're running an illegal copy or not.
However from your description and assuming that each of the OSs you talk of are OEM then you are running totally illegally.
You might just as well have not bothered even spending the relatively small amount of cash on your OEM copies as you are still no more legal than somebody who has illegally obtained their version of the OS.

A court in the land - if it ever did go to court I don't see how you'd have any defence.
However you know it would never get that far.
So why even bother buying the OEM version?
You obviously don't care about being legal - you've already said that, so why bother throwing any money at all on licenses?
It's like stealing a car but leaving some money on the counter for the mats.

 

[stoofa]

wake up and smell the coffee baby

Hi there,

Do you usually just make "smart" comments or do you like to make a comment and then actually bother to back it up with something?

It is not my fault that you do not understand how licensing works.
That is why I am an IT Manager on a good wage and you aren't.

I'm all ears though - if you'd like to back up your statement with anything at all I'm happy to listen and counter.

 

[Tuvoc]

A court in the land - if it ever did go to court I don't see how you'd have any defence.

I think it is Microsoft who would not have a leg to stand on. The case would get thrown out and they would have to pay costs. Microsoft invited re-activation after the hardware change *and accepted it*. End of story,

 

[Tuvoc]

I think what you don't understand is that in countless situations, courts have ruled that a company's actions, where in conflict with a legal agreement, override that agreement. That is exactly what is happening here - Microsoft say that a mobo change requires a new licence, but IN PRACTICE they are accepting re-activations and letting users continue on the existing one. No court in the land would find against the user in that situation.

 

[The Deuce]

Hi there,

Do you usually just make "smart" comments or do you like to make a comment and then actually bother to back it up with something?

It is not my fault that you do not understand how licensing works.
That is why I am an IT Manager on a good wage and you aren't.

I'm all ears though - if you'd like to back up your statement with anything at all I'm happy to listen and counter.

dont rise to his bait!

 

[Burnsy2023]

I think it is Microsoft who would not have a leg to stand on. The case would get thrown out and they would have to pay costs. Microsoft invited re-activation after the hardware change *and accepted it*. End of story,

Key concept that blows your argument out of the water: "Activation is a technological means to prevent unlicensed use of a product. It does NOT prove a product is correctly licensed."

And im probably months behind so this has probably been posted before.

Yes you are, and I'm sorry for the sticky being out of date, I talked to MS about this months ago, but it appears that I've been sloppy and not updated the sticky I'll get it edited in the very near future

As long as you are replacing a motherboard because it is faulty and not because of upgrade reasons, you are entitled to choose the make and model of board as you are a system builder and therefore the warranty supplier.

But it must be a system you have built using a system builder OEM licence. This would not be applicable to a system bought from a OEM such as HP or Dell.

Burnsy

 

[AtreuS]

Key concept that blows your argument out of the water: "Activation is a technological means to prevent unlicensed use of a product. It does NOT prove a product is correctly licensed."



Yes you are, and I'm sorry for the sticky being out of date, I talked to MS about this months ago, but it appears that I've been sloppy and not updated the sticky I'll get it edited in the very near future

As long as you are replacing a motherboard because it is faulty and not because of upgrade reasons, you are entitled to choose the make and model of board as you are a system builder and therefore the warranty supplier.

But it must be a system you have built using a system builder OEM licence. This would not be applicable to a system bought from a OEM such as HP or Dell.

Burnsy

As a side point i wonder what exactly "faulty" means in the case of a system build and therefore warrantied by us?. I build a system and buy an OEM vista and install it. All good so far... by microsofts own admission i am the one who provides the warranty for the machine i built.

After 6 months i decide that, for some reason we will call "odd behavior" i decide the pc is faulty. Now lets be clear, i am the builder of the pc AND the provider of the warranty. So its upto me exactly how i intend to honour the warranty and of course how i process the RMA procedure.

So i tell myself the pc is faulty.. i then return it to myself and i decide that i dont have the time or inclination to repair it so i just swap out the motherboard and what ever else i feel like and re-install the same vista.



So lets see what i have done.

The system builder and warranty provider has repaired/replaced the faulty parts ( including a motherboard ) under the warranty and as such is entitled to reinstall and use the oem vista as agreed by microsoft as you quoted earlier. So its all above board and legal!

The sticking point is the fact that AS the builder AND the provider of the warranty then the terms of the warranty are entirely upto me and no one else. If i decide the terms of my warranty are to replace parts without testing then surely thats upto me?

Something to consider anyway.


Personally i think microsoft knows this happens and frankly dont care that much. The percentage of users who reuse an OEM vista like this will be very small indeed. They have to make rules but they know that people who build their own pcs at home will always use OEM and will always get them reactivated, they cant admit this is something they dont loose slep over so they have to make some form of rule but word it in a way that lets you do what you want ( the fact that you supply your own warranty, making YOU the person who can swap the mainboard out AND still be covered ).

Of course this only applies when you have actually paid for a genuine OEM system builder copy of vista NOT a disc you got off your mates dell or dloaded off torrent.


edit: I seem to remember we debated all this a few months back and came to the same conclusion anyway

 

[Burnsy2023]

This part of MS' policy does require them to trust the system builder. If you lie then that's up to you and you can justify that to yourself however you wish, but you won't be correctly licensed. Only you'll know that and it won't affect the ability to use the software; the only recompense is your own conscience.

Burnsy