New oem rule for xp not known by some computer shops.

[Alias]

The EULA is on the outside of the OEM packs.

Not true. I have three and none of them had the EULA on the outside of the
OEM packs.

Your anti-MS prejudice is showing.

Your ignorance is showing big time.

They are not my favourite company either but in this case I think they are
trying to right a wrong. Previously an unsuspecting user may have
purchased an OEM version of XP and expected support from Microsoft. Now at
least they will have a chance to read the EULA before opening the
software.

Not true.

If they don't agree they can return it. Microsoft is making legitimate
what many retailers were doing anyway and at least trying to make sure
that the end user understands the implications of installing OEM software.
If you have ever seen an unopened OEM pack it is very hard to miss the
EULA.

Kerry

Really? I have three sitting here in front of me and none of them have the
EULA on the outside. Two are Spanish versions and one is an English version.
Soooooooo, like I said, breaking the seal does not mean you have read the
EULA, much less agreed to it. One cannot do that until one starts the
install or after one has installed the OS. The Catch 22 is that broken
sealed OEMs cannot be returned even if you do not want to agree to the EULA.

Alias

 

[Asher_N]

well, I have a bunch of Office 2003 OEM 3-packs, and the EULA is clearly
on the outside of the box.

 

[Alias]

well, I have a bunch of Office 2003 OEM 3-packs, and the EULA is clearly
on the outside of the box.

We were talking about the OS, not Office so what you have with Office is
irrevelant. XP OS does not come with either a box or the EULA on the outside
of a non existent box.

Alias

 

[Asher_N]

3-packs come in a plain brown box. The EULA is on the outside.

 

[Alias]

I've never seen a three pack. I was talking about individual generic Windows
XP OEMs. Those do not have either a plain brown box or an EULA on the
outside of the package.

Alias

 

[Kerry Brown]

Not true. I have three and none of them had the EULA on the outside of the
OEM packs.

What you have are the individual OEM software packages from inside an OEM
pack. OEM packs come in a box with the EULA on a sticker on the outside of
the box. Apparantly the new 1 packs will come in some sort of envelope with
the EULA on the outside. Read my posts before replying. It's pretty clear
I'm talking about OEM packs not indidual software packages from inside the
OEM pack. This is the whole point of the new EULA and 1 pack of OEM XP
software.

Your ignorance is showing big time.


Not true.

See the rest of my post below. You have obviously never seen an unopened OEM
software pack.

Really? I have three sitting here in front of me and none of them have the
EULA on the outside. Two are Spanish versions and one is an English
version. Soooooooo, like I said, breaking the seal does not mean you have
read the EULA, much less agreed to it. One cannot do that until one starts
the install or after one has installed the OS. The Catch 22 is that broken
sealed OEMs cannot be returned even if you do not want to agree to the
EULA.

That is the end user EULA not the OEM EULA. They are two entirely different
things. I made no comments about the end user EULA. The system builder is
bound by the OEM EULA and is the one who must open the OEM pack. The OEM
EULA specifies what you can do with the OEM pack and what has to be done
once the pack is opened. Previously the smallest OEM pack was 3 OEM software
packages. Now there is a 1 pack. What you have is out of a 3 pack or 30 pack
or whatever that has been opened and sold as individual pieces. Under the
new OEM EULA this can no longer be done. Under the old OEM EULA it could be
done if the individual pieces were sold with a piece of non-peripheral
software. There will be much confusion until all the old stock is sold off
and retailers become aware of the new EULA.

Note: I don't have access to the Spanish EULA or OEM program. My knowledge
is only of Canadian and US products. I am not inferring the legality of the
EULA or anything else. I am merely stating my interpretation of the new OEM
EULA as of August 2005. I believe it is a step in the right direction and
will make consumers more aware of the limitations of OEM software before
they install it.

Is that clear enough?

Kerry

 

[Alias]

What you have are the individual OEM software packages from inside an OEM
pack. OEM packs come in a box with the EULA on a sticker on the outside of
the box. Apparantly the new 1 packs will come in some sort of envelope
with the EULA on the outside. Read my posts before replying. It's pretty
clear I'm talking about OEM packs not indidual software packages from
inside the OEM pack. This is the whole point of the new EULA and 1 pack of
OEM XP software.


See the rest of my post below. You have obviously never seen an unopened
OEM software pack.


That is the end user EULA not the OEM EULA. They are two entirely
different things. I made no comments about the end user EULA. The system
builder is bound by the OEM EULA and is the one who must open the OEM
pack. The OEM EULA specifies what you can do with the OEM pack and what
has to be done once the pack is opened. Previously the smallest OEM pack
was 3 OEM software packages. Now there is a 1 pack. What you have is out
of a 3 pack or 30 pack or whatever that has been opened and sold as
individual pieces. Under the new OEM EULA this can no longer be done.
Under the old OEM EULA it could be done if the individual pieces were sold
with a piece of non-peripheral software. There will be much confusion
until all the old stock is sold off and retailers become aware of the new
EULA.

Note: I don't have access to the Spanish EULA or OEM program. My knowledge
is only of Canadian and US products. I am not inferring the legality of
the EULA or anything else. I am merely stating my interpretation of the
new OEM EULA as of August 2005. I believe it is a step in the right
direction and will make consumers more aware of the limitations of OEM
software before they install it.

Is that clear enough?

Kerry

Yes, quite clear. We were talking about two different things

Alias

 

[Bruce Chambers]

The OP is probably refering to this changes:

http://blogs.msdn.com/mssmallbiz/archive/2005/09/07/461950.aspx

" You will notice the loophole that people have been exploiting (the former
language which stated that an OEM desktop Operating System license could be
sold with "non-peripheral hardware,") is no longer in place. It is now very
simple and straightforward: an OEM license must be sold "only with a fully
assembled computer system." Loophole closed. "

I don't consider a blog as a particularly authoritative source. Does
anyone have an *official* Microsoft source for this information?


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH

 

[Mak]

http://oem.microsoft.com/downloads/Public/sblicense/English_SB_License.pdf

 

[Bruce Chambers]

http://oem.microsoft.com/downloads/Public/sblicense/English_SB_License.pdf

Thank you. But that's the System Builder License Agreement, not a new
End User License Agreement (EULA). It applies to systems builders, but
not to consumers, so I'm not at all sure if it's pertinent to the
original question, or not. Of course, the OP's question was horribly
vague, so this could be the answer he was seeking.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH

 

[Mak]

'horribly vague' - indeed (second post of OP wasn't much better), that's why
I said 'probably' in my first reply to you.
In any case that's up to MS on how OEM (and System Builders for that matter
if you want to draw a line in between) should read these new rules.

Possible grey area as I see it: rules apply immediately
or
(unlikely IMHO)
old stock can still operate under old OEM LA (not EULA - I don't know where
all this talk about EULA comes from)

 

[Greg Ro]

Thank you. But that's the System Builder License Agreement, not a new
End User License Agreement (EULA). It applies to systems builders, but
not to consumers, so I'm not at all sure if it's pertinent to the
original question, or not. Of course, the OP's question was horribly
vague, so this could be the answer he was seeking.

I think you need to read my reply to Kerry in this thread and he
agreed

Greg Ro

 

[Kerry Brown]

'horribly vague' - indeed (second post of OP wasn't much better), that's
why I said 'probably' in my first reply to you.
In any case that's up to MS on how OEM (and System Builders for that
matter if you want to draw a line in between) should read these new rules.

Possible grey area as I see it: rules apply immediately
or
(unlikely IMHO)
old stock can still operate under old OEM LA (not EULA - I don't know
where all this talk about EULA comes from)

Your right, my mistake it's the System Bulder License Agreement.

Here's the link:

http://oem.microsoft.com/script/contentpage.aspx?PageID=552816#

You need a MS Passport associated with the OEM system builder program to
view it. If you can view it click on the tutorial. It answers most of the
questions people have asked. According to a Canadian MS rep the system
builder is bound by the license on the package so old stock is still under
the old license.

Kerry

 

[Kerry Brown]

Yes, quite clear. We were talking about two different things

It has been pointed out in another part of this thread that I had my
terminology wrong. It is the System Builder License Agreement not the System
Builder EULA. I apologise for the confusion.

Kerry

 

[Lil' Dave]

Compaq owns your PC, period.

If you build a PC all from parts, and has some form of external
communication, MS owns your computer.

If you build a PC all from parts, no external communications including
internet, you may own your PC.

 

[GregRo]

Compaq owns your PC, period.

If you build a PC all from parts, and has some form of external
communication, MS owns your computer.

If you build a PC all from parts, no external communications including
internet, you may own your PC.

Compaq/hp does not own my PC. Microsoft does not own my pc.

If that was the actually case both Compaq/hp and Microsoft would be
violating Federal and some state laws

This is what I hate about Vista restrictions is Microsoft trying to
tell us-What we can do with are own computer. They is why I won't
buy it.


Greg Ro