, 2006-11-20
Mark Rasch looks at the license agreement for Windows Vista and how its product activation component, which can disable operation of the computer, may be like walking on thin ice.
Expand all |
Post comment
Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries
2006-11-21
FatHed (4 replies)
FatHed (4 replies)
Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries
2006-11-21
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Why none of this matters
2006-11-21
Jake (7 replies)
Jake (7 replies)
Re: Why none of this matters
2006-11-22
Mark D. Rasch (1 replies)
Mark D. Rasch (1 replies)
Where was Rasch four years ago, and what degree in Law does he have?
2006-11-22
Gordon Fecyk (3 replies)
Gordon Fecyk (3 replies)
Re: Where was Rasch four years ago, and what degree in Law does he have?
2006-11-22
Mark D. Rasch (1 replies)
Mark D. Rasch (1 replies)
Does Symantec practice 'self-help' in your 24-year legal opinion?
2006-11-22
Gordon Fecyk (2 replies)
Gordon Fecyk (2 replies)
Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries
2006-11-22
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
What No-one Else Has Noticed
2006-11-24
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Haven't seen those "happy feet" marching off yet for 4 years
2006-11-26
Gordon fecyk (2 replies)
Gordon fecyk (2 replies)
Re: Haven't seen those "happy feet" marching off yet for 4 years
2006-12-12
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries
2006-12-05
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
Re: Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries
2007-01-05
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)

There are numerous articles online that discuss EULA enforcement:
It's harder to find Pro-EULA sites than anti-EULA sites on the net :)
http://www.microscum.com/mmpafaq/
http://www.eff.org/wp/eula.php
http://terranova.blogs.com/terra_nova/2006/10/blacksnow_docu
m.html
http://www.eff.org/IP/Emulation/Blizzard_v_bnetd/20040221_la
w_professor_brief.pdf
I do want to clarify some issues about the return policy.
Microsoft has a pretty open return policy for hardware and software purchased thru retailers, not OEMs in North America. 45 days no questions asked refund, plus 7$ for shipping.
http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/productrefund/softwarr.asp
If you purchase something from Microsoft Online you also have return offerings.
https://om.one.microsoft.com/OPA/htmlpages/TandC.htm
On the back of older MS products is the Orange 30 Money Back Guarantee. I don't know if that is still on the retail boxes or not. But I'm pretty sure you can call the return info number and get clarification.
1-888-673-8624
Recently a gentleman in the UK obtained a refund on an OEM installed copy of XP. http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/08/1358207
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2006/110706-dell-windows.ht
ml
If you don't want to install the Windows Geniune Adavantage (WGA) software you can still use Automatic update to install critical and security hotfixes:
http://forums.microsoft.com/Genuine/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=569
154&SiteID=25
The Windows Activation number also has an automated activation feature, if you wanted to avoid any link to yourself call from a payphone. You don't have to talk to anyone. Registering the software during activation does give you a way to reactivate the software if you loose your license key. You have some proof you are the original owner / licensee of the product.
Use one of the publicly available free email address if you like.
I'm not an MS employee. I do use a lot of their products. I have for almost two decades now. When I first started I had the same concerns that if I purchased the software and I didnt' like it I was screwed. When you are a poor college student, buying an O/S that costs more than a week's pay is a big deal. Heck even the $15 buck I pay for music is food money for a day. $60 bucks for a console game is a nice dinner out for me the wife and both kids. I can't return music, or movies opened, nor can I get refunds on most console games. But I know that I can always get my money back from MS if I ask right questions.
[ reply ]
Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/423/34076#34076