, 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)
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)
The type of control I was referring to is the control to be able to use the OS without having to worry about having to activate/reactivate every time hardware changes or the OS decides to hiccup.
VMware (which I do use) does not solve this problem. The OS still has to be activated to be used..
[ reply ]
Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/423/34100#34100