Microsoft has released licenses for the Windows Vista operating system that dramatically differ from those for Windows XP in that they limit the number of times that retail editions can be transferred to another device and ban the two least-expensive versions from running in a virtual machine. The new licenses, which were highlighted by the Vista team on its official blog Tuesday, add new restrictions to how and where Windows can be used.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
FYI, installing _and_ excuting software are both forms of copying.
Installing and executing software are *not* forms of copying. In any case, copyright law is concerned with distribution of copies, not copying in and of itself.
This is why the GPL can't force you to open-source changes to code that you only use internally. Since you're not redistributing the software, copyright law has no power.
Member since:2006-04-09
> FYI, installing _and_ excuting software are both
> forms of copying.
Installing and executing software are *not* forms of copying. In any case, copyright law is concerned with distribution of copies, not copying in and of itself.
This is why the GPL can't force you to open-source changes to code that you only use internally. Since you're not redistributing the software, copyright law has no power.
Yes, they are.
You'll notice that GPL states "The act of running the Program is not restricted," in article 0.
You'll notice that GPL article 2b only applies to work "distributed or published". _Not_ simply copied.
Microsoft licences also explicitely allow you to install and run the software.
Quentin Garnier.
Member since:
2006-04-09
Might be dumb, but still: tell me who in the world can punish me or do anything for using Windows in VM? I bought a software (or rented it I guess), where I install it, it's 100% my personal choice. I do understand why I can use one copy on X computers and why I shouldn't lend it to someone, but I can install the software on my mobile phone or a refridgerator, if I can, that's none of MS's business.
Yes, it is. The licence tells you what you can do with the copy you have of the software. If you don't agree to the terms of the licence, then you can't make any copy of it. FYI, installing _and_ excuting software are both forms of copying. The licence cannot be more restrictive than the copyright law, but the latter simply doesn't allow the copy.
Of course, it doesn't mean MS aren't complete arseholes, but that's not a reason good enough to ignore the licence.
Caveat emptor.
Quentin Garnier.
Edited 2006-10-13 14:37