Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mcullet
  • Start date Start date
M

mcullet

Guest
Hi,

I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.

MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests. It's one
of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against. However,
as with all things the devil is in the detail.

MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I have a
COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a pirate (might
be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3 days UNLESS I
behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see Pavlov)?

The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they need to
be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and they do not
have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over what we do.
Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.

I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in accord
with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to familiar with
observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes, security patches
and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The hardware environment
is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll leave it to others to
determine at what point the original PC changes sufficiently to warrant
paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS dilemma and needs
wide debate.

MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they are in
breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the agreement by
rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could waste my life
getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more interesting
things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon legitimate
customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed security
controls in their operating system - XP PRO.

The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural meaning.

I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was added or
removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
printeres.

I altered a bios setting.

This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which 'determined'
that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been given a
generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will functionally
challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all other
functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of Orwellian
logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control was
triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control would
not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS (logic
loop).

For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS need do
nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal act of
BIOS altering without their permission or consent.

Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest people
won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously annoyed
and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software contract
imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal contract was
executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.

On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this absurdity to
the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed on the
company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant balance
of karma.

MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done nothing
wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of this
software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a tort.
It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything other
than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in context,
none apply.

So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for trespass
property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I need
only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
licence.

Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong. I've
paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to BIOS
settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out etc) ...
system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to call MS
(big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal life. Good
grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against absurd
commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a sheep
nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had enough of
this crap.

Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being inconvenienced
without due cause.

Watch this space ...

Mike
Australia
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

mcullet wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>
> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests. It's one
> of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against. However,
> as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>
> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I have a
> COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a pirate (might
> be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3 days UNLESS I
> behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see Pavlov)?
>
> The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they need to
> be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and they do not
> have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over what we do.
> Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
> obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.
>
> I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in accord
> with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to familiar with
> observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes, security patches
> and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The hardware environment
> is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll leave it to others to
> determine at what point the original PC changes sufficiently to warrant
> paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS dilemma and needs
> wide debate.
>
> MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
> reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they are in
> breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the agreement by
> rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could waste my life
> getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more interesting
> things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon legitimate
> customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed security
> controls in their operating system - XP PRO.
>
> The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural meaning.
>
> I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was added or
> removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
> printeres.
>
> I altered a bios setting.
>
> This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which 'determined'
> that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been given a
> generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will functionally
> challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all other
> functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
> applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of Orwellian
> logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control was
> triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control would
> not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS (logic
> loop).
>
> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS need do
> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal act of
> BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>
> Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
> Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest people
> won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously annoyed
> and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software contract
> imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal contract was
> executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.
>
> On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this absurdity to
> the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed on the
> company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant balance
> of karma.
>
> MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done nothing
> wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of this
> software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a tort.
> It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything other
> than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in context,
> none apply.
>
> So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for trespass
> property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I need
> only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
> licence.
>
> Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong. I've
> paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
> inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to BIOS
> settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out etc) ...
> system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to call MS
> (big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal life. Good
> grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against absurd
> commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a sheep
> nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had enough of
> this crap.
>
> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being inconvenienced
> without due cause.
>
> Watch this space ...
>
> Mike
> Australia


An alternative could be Ubuntu, a FREE operating system that needs no
activation or becoming "genuine". Check it out at www.ubuntu.com

Alias
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

Hi 'Alias',

Funny you mentioned it :) I'm downloading a distro of Ubuntu as I type.

Do you know that the longest running legal case in UK history involved
McDonalds suing some poor bugger for liable. The other party said something
about McDonalds being unhealthy and employing questionable practices
(advertising / labour etc). The case went to the UK High Court - like the
USA's Supreme Court but with more legal authority. The case ran for years
and cost the company buckets.

McDonalds won on a couple of peripheral points and were awarded nominal
damages verging on contemptuous. On all other legal issues they lost badly
and lost the PR campaign from the outset: terminal case of recurrent auto
foot shooting.

No matter ... the other party never paid and had no capacity to pay.

Our legal system (Australia) is similar to the UK and I don't need to prove
anything other than what is self evident. The remedy to the tort is simple:
(a) make it work and stop turning the damn thing off as they please unless I
have actually done something wrong; (b) nominal compensatory damages.

Simple remedies like this often end up costing gazillions ... MS fought
tooth and nail against legal constraints on their predatory monopolistic
practices. Had to go to the US Supreme Court and they still try to get
around the ruling every day of the week.

I'm interested in Linux but not skilled up on it as yet. I have no
religious preferences on OS's - one is as good as another so long as they do
what they are supposed too.

This ... is a perfect example of a large company bending their customers
over to make sure none of us forget who does what they are told by whom ...
Hey, maybe this should be the new MS logo? Line up a lot of ordinary people
and have them bend over while the MS guy (from the apple advertisement) pulls
on a pair of rubber gloves and lubes up. Slogan? "MS ... chasing down
pirates until your butt bleeds."

Mike

"Alias" wrote:

> An alternative could be Ubuntu, a FREE operating system that needs no
> activation or becoming "genuine". Check it out at www.ubuntu.com
>
> Alias
>
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

mcullet wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>
> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests.
> It's one of those self evident statements that are tough to argue
> against. However, as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>
> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I
> have a COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm
> a pirate (might be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP
> PRO after 3 days UNLESS I behave like a good little sheep and do as
> I'm told (see Pavlov)?
>


What Microsoft does is no different from the usher at the door asking to see
your ticket stub for readmittance. The usher can't determine whether you
simply had to make an urgent call of nature or whether you're trying to see
the movie for free.

If you don't like the hassle, you have two alternatives.

Don't go to theatres with that policy, or

Pee in your pants.
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

mcullet wrote:
> Hi 'Alias',
>
> Funny you mentioned it :) I'm downloading a distro of Ubuntu as I type.
>
> Do you know that the longest running legal case in UK history involved
> McDonalds suing some poor bugger for liable. The other party said something
> about McDonalds being unhealthy and employing questionable practices
> (advertising / labour etc). The case went to the UK High Court - like the
> USA's Supreme Court but with more legal authority. The case ran for years
> and cost the company buckets.
>
> McDonalds won on a couple of peripheral points and were awarded nominal
> damages verging on contemptuous. On all other legal issues they lost badly
> and lost the PR campaign from the outset: terminal case of recurrent auto
> foot shooting.
>
> No matter ... the other party never paid and had no capacity to pay.
>
> Our legal system (Australia) is similar to the UK and I don't need to prove
> anything other than what is self evident. The remedy to the tort is simple:
> (a) make it work and stop turning the damn thing off as they please unless I
> have actually done something wrong; (b) nominal compensatory damages.
>
> Simple remedies like this often end up costing gazillions ... MS fought
> tooth and nail against legal constraints on their predatory monopolistic
> practices. Had to go to the US Supreme Court and they still try to get
> around the ruling every day of the week.
>
> I'm interested in Linux but not skilled up on it as yet. I have no
> religious preferences on OS's - one is as good as another so long as they do
> what they are supposed too.
>
> This ... is a perfect example of a large company bending their customers
> over to make sure none of us forget who does what they are told by whom ...
> Hey, maybe this should be the new MS logo? Line up a lot of ordinary people
> and have them bend over while the MS guy (from the apple advertisement) pulls
> on a pair of rubber gloves and lubes up. Slogan? "MS ... chasing down
> pirates until your butt bleeds."
>
> Mike
>
> "Alias" wrote:
>
>> An alternative could be Ubuntu, a FREE operating system that needs no
>> activation or becoming "genuine". Check it out at www.ubuntu.com
>>
>> Alias
>>


If you have any questions about Ubuntu, email me.

Alias
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

HeyBub wrote:
> mcullet wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>>
>> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests.
>> It's one of those self evident statements that are tough to argue
>> against. However, as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>>
>> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I
>> have a COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm
>> a pirate (might be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP
>> PRO after 3 days UNLESS I behave like a good little sheep and do as
>> I'm told (see Pavlov)?
>>

>
> What Microsoft does is no different from the usher at the door asking to see
> your ticket stub for readmittance. The usher can't determine whether you
> simply had to make an urgent call of nature or whether you're trying to see
> the movie for free.
>
> If you don't like the hassle, you have two alternatives.
>
> Don't go to theatres with that policy, or
>
> Pee in your pants.
>
>


What a suck up fan boy you are, bub. MS made BILLIONS off of pre XP
Windows. Most people buy the OS preinstalled or are honest so there's no
need for activation or becoming "genuine". Those who want a pirated copy
of XP are not going to be stopped by WPA or WGA. Only paying customers
have to jump through those hoops.

Alias
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

Hello Mike,

This kind of discussion has been going on since at least the initial release
of XP.

You wrote: "So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for
trespass
property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I need
only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
licence."

From what I can tell from these regularly-occurring screeds that appear in
these newsgroups, no one has yet tried to take Microsoft to Court about
this, possibly because of the amount of money an individual would have to
spend to hire a lawyer.

Conversely, from what I've read here in the newsgroups, Microsoft also has
never gone to Court to test the validity of its EULA, maybe because it does
have the upper hand via the ability to disable someone's operating system.
And, of course Microsoft does have the advantage of having many, many
lawyers at its disposal, if it were to be sued.

It seems to me that a consumer who feels aggrieved by the EULA, and who is
not willing to accede to Microsoft's demands for reactivation, will have a
non-functional XP operating system within a short period of time. They can
scream, yell and rant, but that's all that's going to happen unless they
take the next step and sue.

I actually would love to see someone take Microsoft to Court over this.

Will you be the person who finally forces Microsoft's hand?

Alan


"mcullet" <mcullet@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DD449FA6-95AD-4BBA-ADC8-0C4FC84CDF80@microsoft.com...
> Hi,
>
> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>
> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests. It's one
> of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against.
> However,
> as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>
> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I have a
> COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a pirate
> (might
> be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3 days UNLESS
> I
> behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see Pavlov)?
>
> The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they need to
> be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and they do not
> have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over what we
> do.
> Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
> obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.
>
> I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in accord
> with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to familiar
> with
> observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes, security
> patches
> and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The hardware
> environment
> is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll leave it to others to
> determine at what point the original PC changes sufficiently to warrant
> paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS dilemma and
> needs
> wide debate.
>
> MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
> reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they are in
> breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the agreement by
> rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could waste my
> life
> getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more interesting
> things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon
> legitimate
> customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed security
> controls in their operating system - XP PRO.
>
> The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural meaning.
>
> I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was added or
> removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
> printeres.
>
> I altered a bios setting.
>
> This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which
> 'determined'
> that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been given a
> generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will functionally
> challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all other
> functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
> applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of
> Orwellian
> logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control was
> triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control would
> not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS (logic
> loop).
>
> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS need do
> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal act
> of
> BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>
> Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
> Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest
> people
> won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously
> annoyed
> and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software contract
> imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal contract
> was
> executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.
>
> On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this absurdity
> to
> the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed on the
> company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant
> balance
> of karma.
>
> MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done nothing
> wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of this
> software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a
> tort.
> It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything other
> than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in
> context,
> none apply.
>
> So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for trespass
> property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I
> need
> only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
> licence.
>
> Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong.
> I've
> paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
> inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to BIOS
> settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out etc) ...
> system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to call
> MS
> (big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal life.
> Good
> grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against absurd
> commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a sheep
> nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had enough
> of
> this crap.
>
> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being inconvenienced
> without due cause.
>
> Watch this space ...
>
> Mike
> Australia
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

In the time it took you to write your post, you could have called a
toll-free number and reactivated.

Description of Microsoft Product Activation:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/302806

> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS need do
> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal act
> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.


Have you read your WinXP EULA lately?


mcullet wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>
> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests. It's one
> of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against.
> However,
> as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>
> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I have a
> COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a pirate
> (might be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3 days
> UNLESS I behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see Pavlov)?
>
> The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they need to
> be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and they do not
> have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over what we
> do.
> Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
> obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.
>
> I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in accord
> with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to familiar
> with observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes, security
> patches and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The hardware
> environment is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll leave it
> to
> others to determine at what point the original PC changes sufficiently to
> warrant paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS dilemma
> and needs wide debate.
>
> MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
> reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they are in
> breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the agreement by
> rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could waste my
> life
> getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more interesting
> things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon
> legitimate
> customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed security
> controls in their operating system - XP PRO.
>
> The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural meaning.
>
> I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was added or
> removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
> printeres.
>
> I altered a bios setting.
>
> This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which
> 'determined'
> that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been given a
> generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will functionally
> challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all other
> functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
> applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of
> Orwellian
> logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control was
> triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control would
> not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS (logic
> loop).
>
> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS need do
> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal act
> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>
> Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
> Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest
> people
> won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously
> annoyed
> and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software contract
> imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal contract
> was
> executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.
>
> On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this absurdity
> to
> the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed on the
> company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant
> balance
> of karma.
>
> MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done nothing
> wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of this
> software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a
> tort.
> It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything other
> than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in
> context, none apply.
>
> So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for trespass
> property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I
> need
> only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
> licence.
>
> Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong.
> I've
> paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
> inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to BIOS
> settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out etc) ...
> system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to call
> MS
> (big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal life.
> Good grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against absurd
> commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a sheep
> nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had enough
> of this crap.
>
> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being inconvenienced
> without due cause.
>
> Watch this space ...
>
> Mike
> Australia
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
> In the time it took you to write your post, you could have called a
> toll-free number and reactivated.


Not the point.

>
> Description of Microsoft Product Activation:
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/302806
>
>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS
>> need do
>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal
>> act
>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.

>
> Have you read your WinXP EULA lately?


You mean the one that if you don't agree with it you can't get your
money back, that one? How many people who bought a preinstalled copy of
XP on a new computer got the chance to read it before accepting it or is
the acceptance assumed when they purchase the system?

WPA and WGA only serve to inconvenience paying customers and do
absolutely nothing to stop piracy.

Alias
>
>
> mcullet wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>>
>> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests. It's
>> one
>> of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against.
>> However,
>> as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>>
>> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I
>> have a
>> COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a pirate
>> (might be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3
>> days
>> UNLESS I behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see Pavlov)?
>>
>> The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they
>> need to
>> be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and they do
>> not
>> have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over what we
>> do.
>> Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
>> obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.
>>
>> I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in accord
>> with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to familiar
>> with observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes, security
>> patches and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The hardware
>> environment is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll leave it
>> to
>> others to determine at what point the original PC changes sufficiently to
>> warrant paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS
>> dilemma
>> and needs wide debate.
>>
>> MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
>> reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they are in
>> breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the agreement by
>> rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could waste my
>> life
>> getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more interesting
>> things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon
>> legitimate
>> customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed security
>> controls in their operating system - XP PRO.
>>
>> The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural meaning.
>>
>> I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was added or
>> removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
>> printeres.
>>
>> I altered a bios setting.
>>
>> This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which
>> 'determined'
>> that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been given a
>> generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will functionally
>> challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all other
>> functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
>> applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of
>> Orwellian
>> logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control was
>> triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control
>> would
>> not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS (logic
>> loop).
>>
>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS
>> need do
>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal
>> act
>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>>
>> Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
>> Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest
>> people
>> won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously
>> annoyed
>> and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software
>> contract
>> imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal contract
>> was
>> executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.
>>
>> On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this absurdity
>> to
>> the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed on the
>> company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant
>> balance
>> of karma.
>>
>> MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done
>> nothing
>> wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of
>> this
>> software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a
>> tort.
>> It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything other
>> than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in
>> context, none apply.
>>
>> So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for trespass
>> property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I
>> need
>> only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
>> licence.
>>
>> Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong.
>> I've
>> paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
>> inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to BIOS
>> settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out etc) ...
>> system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to call
>> MS
>> (big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal life.
>> Good grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against
>> absurd
>> commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a
>> sheep
>> nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had
>> enough
>> of this crap.
>>
>> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being inconvenienced
>> without due cause.
>>
>> Watch this space ...
>>
>> Mike
>> Australia

>
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

VanguardLH wrote:
> mcullet wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>>
>> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests. It's one
>> of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against. However,
>> as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>>
>> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I have a
>> COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a pirate (might
>> be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3 days UNLESS I
>> behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see Pavlov)?
>>
>> The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they need to
>> be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and they do not
>> have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over what we do.
>> Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
>> obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.
>>
>> I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in accord
>> with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to familiar with
>> observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes, security patches
>> and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The hardware environment
>> is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll leave it to others to
>> determine at what point the original PC changes sufficiently to warrant
>> paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS dilemma and needs
>> wide debate.
>>
>> MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
>> reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they are in
>> breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the agreement by
>> rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could waste my life
>> getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more interesting
>> things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon legitimate
>> customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed security
>> controls in their operating system - XP PRO.
>>
>> The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural meaning.
>>
>> I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was added or
>> removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
>> printeres.
>>
>> I altered a bios setting.
>>
>> This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which 'determined'
>> that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been given a
>> generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will functionally
>> challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all other
>> functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
>> applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of Orwellian
>> logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control was
>> triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control would
>> not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS (logic
>> loop).
>>
>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS need do
>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal act of
>> BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>>
>> Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
>> Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest people
>> won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously annoyed
>> and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software contract
>> imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal contract was
>> executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.
>>
>> On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this absurdity to
>> the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed on the
>> company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant balance
>> of karma.
>>
>> MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done nothing
>> wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of this
>> software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a tort.
>> It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything other
>> than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in context,
>> none apply.
>>
>> So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for trespass
>> property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I need
>> only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
>> licence.
>>
>> Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong. I've
>> paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
>> inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to BIOS
>> settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out etc) ...
>> system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to call MS
>> (big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal life. Good
>> grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against absurd
>> commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a sheep
>> nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had enough of
>> this crap.
>>
>> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being inconvenienced
>> without due cause.
>>
>> Watch this space ...
>>
>> Mike
>> Australia

>
> A rant from a child who actually believes they are the one in control.
> If you don't want to comply with their requirements, don't use their
> software. There are LOTS of other choices.


There are also ways to use it without complying with their scammy
requirements.

Alias
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

mcullet wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>
> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests. It's one
> of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against. However,
> as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>
> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I have a
> COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a pirate (might
> be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3 days UNLESS I
> behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see Pavlov)?
>
> The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they need to
> be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and they do not
> have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over what we do.
> Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
> obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.
>
> I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in accord
> with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to familiar with
> observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes, security patches
> and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The hardware environment
> is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll leave it to others to
> determine at what point the original PC changes sufficiently to warrant
> paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS dilemma and needs
> wide debate.
>
> MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
> reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they are in
> breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the agreement by
> rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could waste my life
> getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more interesting
> things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon legitimate
> customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed security
> controls in their operating system - XP PRO.
>
> The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural meaning.
>
> I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was added or
> removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
> printeres.
>
> I altered a bios setting.
>
> This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which 'determined'
> that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been given a
> generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will functionally
> challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all other
> functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
> applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of Orwellian
> logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control was
> triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control would
> not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS (logic
> loop).
>
> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS need do
> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal act of
> BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>
> Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
> Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest people
> won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously annoyed
> and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software contract
> imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal contract was
> executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.
>
> On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this absurdity to
> the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed on the
> company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant balance
> of karma.
>
> MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done nothing
> wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of this
> software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a tort.
> It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything other
> than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in context,
> none apply.
>
> So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for trespass
> property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I need
> only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
> licence.
>
> Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong. I've
> paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
> inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to BIOS
> settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out etc) ...
> system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to call MS
> (big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal life. Good
> grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against absurd
> commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a sheep
> nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had enough of
> this crap.
>
> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being inconvenienced
> without due cause.
>
> Watch this space ...
>
> Mike
> Australia


A rant from a child who actually believes they are the one in control.
If you don't want to comply with their requirements, don't use their
software. There are LOTS of other choices.
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

Butt out, Alias.

Alias wrote:
> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>> In the time it took you to write your post, you could have called a
>> toll-free number and reactivated.

>
> Not the point.
>
>>
>> Description of Microsoft Product Activation:
>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/302806
>>
>>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
>>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS
>>> need do
>>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal
>>> act
>>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.

>>
>> Have you read your WinXP EULA lately?

>
> You mean the one that if you don't agree with it you can't get your
> money back, that one? How many people who bought a preinstalled copy of
> XP on a new computer got the chance to read it before accepting it or is
> the acceptance assumed when they purchase the system?
>
> WPA and WGA only serve to inconvenience paying customers and do
> absolutely nothing to stop piracy.
>
> Alias
>>
>>
>> mcullet wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>>>
>>> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests. It's
>>> one
>>> of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against.
>>> However,
>>> as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>>>
>>> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I
>>> have a
>>> COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a pirate
>>> (might be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3
>>> days
>>> UNLESS I behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see
>>> Pavlov)?
>>>
>>> The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they
>>> need to
>>> be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and they do
>>> not
>>> have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over what we
>>> do.
>>> Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
>>> obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.
>>>
>>> I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in
>>> accord
>>> with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to familiar
>>> with observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes,
>>> security
>>> patches and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The
>>> hardware
>>> environment is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll leave it
>>> to
>>> others to determine at what point the original PC changes sufficiently
>>> to
>>> warrant paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS
>>> dilemma
>>> and needs wide debate.
>>>
>>> MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
>>> reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they are
>>> in
>>> breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the agreement by
>>> rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could waste my
>>> life
>>> getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more
>>> interesting
>>> things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon
>>> legitimate
>>> customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed security
>>> controls in their operating system - XP PRO.
>>>
>>> The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural meaning.
>>>
>>> I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was added or
>>> removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
>>> printeres.
>>>
>>> I altered a bios setting.
>>>
>>> This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which
>>> 'determined'
>>> that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been given a
>>> generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will functionally
>>> challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all other
>>> functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
>>> applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of
>>> Orwellian
>>> logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control was
>>> triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control
>>> would
>>> not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS (logic
>>> loop).
>>>
>>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
>>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS
>>> need do
>>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal
>>> act
>>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>>>
>>> Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
>>> Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest
>>> people
>>> won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously
>>> annoyed
>>> and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software
>>> contract
>>> imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal contract
>>> was
>>> executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this absurdity
>>> to
>>> the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed on the
>>> company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant
>>> balance
>>> of karma.
>>>
>>> MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done
>>> nothing
>>> wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of
>>> this
>>> software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a
>>> tort.
>>> It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything
>>> other
>>> than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in
>>> context, none apply.
>>>
>>> So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for trespass
>>> property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I
>>> need
>>> only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
>>> licence.
>>>
>>> Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong.
>>> I've
>>> paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
>>> inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to BIOS
>>> settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out etc)
>>> ...
>>> system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to
>>> call
>>> MS
>>> (big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal life.
>>> Good grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against
>>> absurd
>>> commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a
>>> sheep
>>> nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had
>>> enough
>>> of this crap.
>>>
>>> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being
>>> inconvenienced
>>> without due cause.
>>>
>>> Watch this space ...
>>>
>>> Mike
>>> Australia
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
> Butt out, Alias.


My, what a convincing argument! LOL! Hit a button, did I?

Alias
>
> Alias wrote:
>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>> In the time it took you to write your post, you could have called a
>>> toll-free number and reactivated.

>>
>> Not the point.
>>
>>>
>>> Description of Microsoft Product Activation:
>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/302806
>>>
>>>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
>>>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS
>>>> need do
>>>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal
>>>> act
>>>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>>>
>>> Have you read your WinXP EULA lately?

>>
>> You mean the one that if you don't agree with it you can't get your
>> money back, that one? How many people who bought a preinstalled copy of
>> XP on a new computer got the chance to read it before accepting it or is
>> the acceptance assumed when they purchase the system?
>>
>> WPA and WGA only serve to inconvenience paying customers and do
>> absolutely nothing to stop piracy.
>>
>> Alias
>>>
>>>
>>> mcullet wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>>>>
>>>> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests. It's
>>>> one
>>>> of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against.
>>>> However,
>>>> as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>>>>
>>>> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I
>>>> have a
>>>> COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a pirate
>>>> (might be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3
>>>> days
>>>> UNLESS I behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see
>>>> Pavlov)?
>>>>
>>>> The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they
>>>> need to
>>>> be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and they do
>>>> not
>>>> have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over
>>>> what we
>>>> do.
>>>> Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
>>>> obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.
>>>>
>>>> I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in
>>>> accord
>>>> with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to
>>>> familiar
>>>> with observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes,
>>>> security
>>>> patches and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The
>>>> hardware
>>>> environment is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll
>>>> leave it
>>>> to
>>>> others to determine at what point the original PC changes
>>>> sufficiently to
>>>> warrant paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS
>>>> dilemma
>>>> and needs wide debate.
>>>>
>>>> MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
>>>> reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they
>>>> are in
>>>> breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the agreement by
>>>> rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could waste my
>>>> life
>>>> getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more
>>>> interesting
>>>> things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon
>>>> legitimate
>>>> customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed security
>>>> controls in their operating system - XP PRO.
>>>>
>>>> The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural meaning.
>>>>
>>>> I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was added or
>>>> removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
>>>> printeres.
>>>>
>>>> I altered a bios setting.
>>>>
>>>> This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which
>>>> 'determined'
>>>> that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been given a
>>>> generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will
>>>> functionally
>>>> challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all other
>>>> functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
>>>> applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of
>>>> Orwellian
>>>> logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control was
>>>> triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control
>>>> would
>>>> not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS (logic
>>>> loop).
>>>>
>>>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
>>>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS
>>>> need do
>>>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal
>>>> act
>>>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
>>>> Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest
>>>> people
>>>> won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously
>>>> annoyed
>>>> and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software
>>>> contract
>>>> imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal
>>>> contract
>>>> was
>>>> executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this
>>>> absurdity
>>>> to
>>>> the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed on the
>>>> company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant
>>>> balance
>>>> of karma.
>>>>
>>>> MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done
>>>> nothing
>>>> wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of
>>>> this
>>>> software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a
>>>> tort.
>>>> It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything
>>>> other
>>>> than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in
>>>> context, none apply.
>>>>
>>>> So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for
>>>> trespass
>>>> property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I
>>>> need
>>>> only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
>>>> licence.
>>>>
>>>> Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong.
>>>> I've
>>>> paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
>>>> inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to BIOS
>>>> settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out
>>>> etc) ...
>>>> system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to
>>>> call
>>>> MS
>>>> (big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal life.
>>>> Good grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against
>>>> absurd
>>>> commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a
>>>> sheep
>>>> nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had
>>>> enough
>>>> of this crap.
>>>>
>>>> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being
>>>> inconvenienced
>>>> without due cause.
>>>>
>>>> Watch this space ...
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>> Australia

>
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

Yeah, the button you always hit when you hijack someone else's thread to
grind your axe.

Alias wrote:
> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>> Butt out, Alias.

>
> My, what a convincing argument! LOL! Hit a button, did I?
>
> Alias
>>
>> Alias wrote:
>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>>> In the time it took you to write your post, you could have called a
>>>> toll-free number and reactivated.
>>>
>>> Not the point.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Description of Microsoft Product Activation:
>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/302806
>>>>
>>>>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption
>>>>> of
>>>>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS
>>>>> need do
>>>>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal
>>>>> act
>>>>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>>>>
>>>> Have you read your WinXP EULA lately?
>>>
>>> You mean the one that if you don't agree with it you can't get your
>>> money back, that one? How many people who bought a preinstalled copy of
>>> XP on a new computer got the chance to read it before accepting it or is
>>> the acceptance assumed when they purchase the system?
>>>
>>> WPA and WGA only serve to inconvenience paying customers and do
>>> absolutely nothing to stop piracy.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> mcullet wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>>>>>
>>>>> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests. It's
>>>>> one
>>>>> of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against.
>>>>> However,
>>>>> as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>>>>>
>>>>> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I
>>>>> have a
>>>>> COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a pirate
>>>>> (might be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3
>>>>> days
>>>>> UNLESS I behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see
>>>>> Pavlov)?
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they
>>>>> need to
>>>>> be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and they do
>>>>> not
>>>>> have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over
>>>>> what we
>>>>> do.
>>>>> Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
>>>>> obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.
>>>>>
>>>>> I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in
>>>>> accord
>>>>> with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to
>>>>> familiar
>>>>> with observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes,
>>>>> security
>>>>> patches and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The
>>>>> hardware
>>>>> environment is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll
>>>>> leave it
>>>>> to
>>>>> others to determine at what point the original PC changes
>>>>> sufficiently to
>>>>> warrant paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS
>>>>> dilemma
>>>>> and needs wide debate.
>>>>>
>>>>> MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
>>>>> reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they
>>>>> are in
>>>>> breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the agreement
>>>>> by
>>>>> rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could waste
>>>>> my
>>>>> life
>>>>> getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more
>>>>> interesting
>>>>> things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon
>>>>> legitimate
>>>>> customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed security
>>>>> controls in their operating system - XP PRO.
>>>>>
>>>>> The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural meaning.
>>>>>
>>>>> I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was added
>>>>> or
>>>>> removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
>>>>> printeres.
>>>>>
>>>>> I altered a bios setting.
>>>>>
>>>>> This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which
>>>>> 'determined'
>>>>> that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been given
>>>>> a
>>>>> generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will
>>>>> functionally
>>>>> challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all other
>>>>> functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
>>>>> applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of
>>>>> Orwellian
>>>>> logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control was
>>>>> triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control
>>>>> would
>>>>> not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS
>>>>> (logic
>>>>> loop).
>>>>>
>>>>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption
>>>>> of
>>>>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS
>>>>> need do
>>>>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal
>>>>> act
>>>>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
>>>>> Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest
>>>>> people
>>>>> won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously
>>>>> annoyed
>>>>> and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software
>>>>> contract
>>>>> imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal
>>>>> contract
>>>>> was
>>>>> executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this
>>>>> absurdity
>>>>> to
>>>>> the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed on
>>>>> the
>>>>> company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant
>>>>> balance
>>>>> of karma.
>>>>>
>>>>> MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done
>>>>> nothing
>>>>> wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of
>>>>> this
>>>>> software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a
>>>>> tort.
>>>>> It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything
>>>>> other
>>>>> than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in
>>>>> context, none apply.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for
>>>>> trespass
>>>>> property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I
>>>>> need
>>>>> only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
>>>>> licence.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong.
>>>>> I've
>>>>> paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
>>>>> inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to
>>>>> BIOS
>>>>> settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out
>>>>> etc) ...
>>>>> system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to
>>>>> call
>>>>> MS
>>>>> (big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal
>>>>> life.
>>>>> Good grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against
>>>>> absurd
>>>>> commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a
>>>>> sheep
>>>>> nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had
>>>>> enough
>>>>> of this crap.
>>>>>
>>>>> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being
>>>>> inconvenienced
>>>>> without due cause.
>>>>>
>>>>> Watch this space ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>> Australia
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

"HeyBub" wrote:

> What Microsoft does is no different from the usher at the door asking to see
> your ticket stub for readmittance. The usher can't determine whether you
> simply had to make an urgent call of nature or whether you're trying to see
> the movie for free.
>
> If you don't like the hassle, you have two alternatives.
>
> Don't go to theatres with that policy, or
>
> Pee in your pants.


Hi Heybub,

Interesting take ... and an inappropriate analogy.

I'm not watching a movie - I'm at home. When we purchase a movie ticket we
are purchasing the right to watch a movie in a theatre. When we pop out to
go to the loo then we are moving away from the theatre to the loo and the
owner has a valid reason to ascertain our bona fides before letting us back
in ... a subsequent transaction.

I purchased a licence to use XP PRO on my PC. I've done nothing wrong, used
it entirely consistently within the agreement (a contract if this has any
meaning for you) and made no change to my hardware of any substance.

I changed a bios setting so MS unilaterally decided I am a potential pirate
and have given me 3 days to act before they shut down the OS and my system.

Your analogy would be more accurate if the usher saw me put tuck in my shirt
(one that I wore on entering the theatre). Upon the observation of the usher
that I looked like a criminal (all criminal tuck in their shirts) they then
forced me out of the theatre until I showed them my ticket stub.

If I happened to have lost the stub then I'm screwed. If I take time to
locate the stub (it's somewhere in one of my pockets) then I'm missing out on
enjoying the movie. No matter what else, I'm being distrurbed by a pissy
usher because they took offence to me tucking in my shirt ... after all, only
criminal tuck in their shirts and honest folk would not have a problem with
ushers policing such things. After all, honest folk have nothing to hide.

Yeah ... bend over dude and you might find you have bcome MS's glove puppet.

It's wrong. It's based on an appallingly faulty design flaw (easily
triggered by ordinary LEGAL use) and based on a premise that customers are
criminals in waiting.

So I have more choices han your limited imagination can grasp. Among them,
is the choice to complain loudly that the 'Emperor has no clothes.' MS have
been embarrassed into correcting bad decisions before now ... I have no
expectations they will do a thing unless they see no commercial alternative
(read: cost benefit). They change only because the cost of doing things the
same way (pointing guns at customers) is greater than the cost of changing
(treating customers with respect).

HeyBub, pee in your pants if an usher intimates you. That's your choice.
Me? If all I did was tuck in my shirt then I'm inclined to tell the usher to
get lost.

Seems social conditioning has been highly effective for you and I would not
want to wake you up ...

Cheers,

Mike
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

mcullet wrote:
> "HeyBub" wrote:
>
>> What Microsoft does is no different from the usher at the door
>> asking to see your ticket stub for readmittance. The usher can't
>> determine whether you simply had to make an urgent call of nature or
>> whether you're trying to see the movie for free.
>>
>> If you don't like the hassle, you have two alternatives.
>>
>> Don't go to theatres with that policy, or
>>
>> Pee in your pants.

>
> Hi Heybub,
>
> Interesting take ... and an inappropriate analogy.
>
> I'm not watching a movie - I'm at home. When we purchase a movie
> ticket we are purchasing the right to watch a movie in a theatre.
> When we pop out to go to the loo then we are moving away from the
> theatre to the loo and the owner has a valid reason to ascertain our
> bona fides before letting us back in ... a subsequent transaction.
>
> I purchased a licence to use XP PRO on my PC. I've done nothing
> wrong, used it entirely consistently within the agreement (a contract
> if this has any meaning for you) and made no change to my hardware of
> any substance.
>
> I changed a bios setting so MS unilaterally decided I am a potential
> pirate and have given me 3 days to act before they shut down the OS
> and my system.
>
> Your analogy would be more accurate if the usher saw me put tuck in
> my shirt (one that I wore on entering the theatre). Upon the
> observation of the usher that I looked like a criminal (all criminal
> tuck in their shirts) they then forced me out of the theatre until I
> showed them my ticket stub.
>
> If I happened to have lost the stub then I'm screwed. If I take time
> to locate the stub (it's somewhere in one of my pockets) then I'm
> missing out on enjoying the movie. No matter what else, I'm being
> distrurbed by a pissy usher because they took offence to me tucking
> in my shirt ... after all, only criminal tuck in their shirts and
> honest folk would not have a problem with ushers policing such
> things. After all, honest folk have nothing to hide.
>
> Yeah ... bend over dude and you might find you have bcome MS's glove
> puppet.
>
> It's wrong. It's based on an appallingly faulty design flaw (easily
> triggered by ordinary LEGAL use) and based on a premise that
> customers are criminals in waiting.
>
> So I have more choices han your limited imagination can grasp. Among
> them, is the choice to complain loudly that the 'Emperor has no
> clothes.' MS have been embarrassed into correcting bad decisions
> before now ... I have no expectations they will do a thing unless
> they see no commercial alternative (read: cost benefit). They change
> only because the cost of doing things the same way (pointing guns at
> customers) is greater than the cost of changing (treating customers
> with respect).
>
> HeyBub, pee in your pants if an usher intimates you. That's your
> choice. Me? If all I did was tuck in my shirt then I'm inclined to
> tell the usher to get lost.
>
> Seems social conditioning has been highly effective for you and I
> would not want to wake you up ...


Ushers have no reason to intimidate me; I play by the rules and make sure I
have my ticket stub before I leave.

One difference you overlooked is that by not conforming to the wishes of
Microsoft, you lose your operating system. By not conforming to the wishes
of the user you lose your liberty.

Of the two, I'd say Microsoft's policy is considerably more benign.
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

The MS "Windows any version" Eula is NOT enforceable where he lives in
Australia.

It has been tested in an Australian court and found to be in breach of a
section
of the Australian trade practises act 1988 as amended 2001.
Not that it stops MS from giving impression it is enforceable.
John H


"PA Bear [MS MVP]" <PABearMVP@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23oibaN7$IHA.5048@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> In the time it took you to write your post, you could have called a
> toll-free number and reactivated.
>
> Description of Microsoft Product Activation:
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/302806
>
>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS need
>> do
>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal
>> act
>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.

>
> Have you read your WinXP EULA lately?
>
>
> mcullet wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>>
>> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests. It's
>> one
>> of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against.
>> However,
>> as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>>
>> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I have
>> a
>> COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a pirate
>> (might be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3
>> days
>> UNLESS I behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see Pavlov)?
>>
>> The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they need
>> to
>> be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and they do
>> not
>> have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over what we
>> do.
>> Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
>> obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.
>>
>> I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in accord
>> with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to familiar
>> with observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes, security
>> patches and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The hardware
>> environment is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll leave it
>> to
>> others to determine at what point the original PC changes sufficiently to
>> warrant paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS
>> dilemma
>> and needs wide debate.
>>
>> MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
>> reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they are in
>> breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the agreement by
>> rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could waste my
>> life
>> getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more interesting
>> things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon
>> legitimate
>> customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed security
>> controls in their operating system - XP PRO.
>>
>> The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural meaning.
>>
>> I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was added or
>> removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
>> printeres.
>>
>> I altered a bios setting.
>>
>> This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which
>> 'determined'
>> that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been given a
>> generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will functionally
>> challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all other
>> functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
>> applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of
>> Orwellian
>> logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control was
>> triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control
>> would
>> not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS (logic
>> loop).
>>
>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from presumption of
>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS need
>> do
>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a criminal
>> act
>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>>
>> Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
>> Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest
>> people
>> won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously
>> annoyed
>> and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software
>> contract
>> imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal contract
>> was
>> executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.
>>
>> On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this absurdity
>> to
>> the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed on the
>> company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant
>> balance
>> of karma.
>>
>> MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done
>> nothing
>> wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of
>> this
>> software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a
>> tort.
>> It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything other
>> than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in
>> context, none apply.
>>
>> So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for trespass
>> property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I said, I
>> need
>> only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
>> licence.
>>
>> Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong.
>> I've
>> paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
>> inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to BIOS
>> settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out etc) ...
>> system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to call
>> MS
>> (big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal life.
>> Good grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against
>> absurd
>> commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a
>> sheep
>> nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had
>> enough
>> of this crap.
>>
>> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being inconvenienced
>> without due cause.
>>
>> Watch this space ...
>>
>> Mike
>> Australia

>
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

"mcullet" <mcullet@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:DD449FA6-95AD-4BBA-ADC8-0C4FC84CDF80@microsoft.com...

> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being inconvenienced
> without due cause.
>
> Watch this space ...
>


You're Hilarious. Truly.

Pick up the phone and activate, it will all be over soon after that.

- WindPipe
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

HeyBub wrote:
> mcullet wrote:
>> "HeyBub" wrote:
>>
>>> What Microsoft does is no different from the usher at the door
>>> asking to see your ticket stub for readmittance. The usher can't
>>> determine whether you simply had to make an urgent call of nature or
>>> whether you're trying to see the movie for free.
>>>
>>> If you don't like the hassle, you have two alternatives.
>>>
>>> Don't go to theatres with that policy, or
>>>
>>> Pee in your pants.

>> Hi Heybub,
>>
>> Interesting take ... and an inappropriate analogy.
>>
>> I'm not watching a movie - I'm at home. When we purchase a movie
>> ticket we are purchasing the right to watch a movie in a theatre.
>> When we pop out to go to the loo then we are moving away from the
>> theatre to the loo and the owner has a valid reason to ascertain our
>> bona fides before letting us back in ... a subsequent transaction.
>>
>> I purchased a licence to use XP PRO on my PC. I've done nothing
>> wrong, used it entirely consistently within the agreement (a contract
>> if this has any meaning for you) and made no change to my hardware of
>> any substance.
>>
>> I changed a bios setting so MS unilaterally decided I am a potential
>> pirate and have given me 3 days to act before they shut down the OS
>> and my system.
>>
>> Your analogy would be more accurate if the usher saw me put tuck in
>> my shirt (one that I wore on entering the theatre). Upon the
>> observation of the usher that I looked like a criminal (all criminal
>> tuck in their shirts) they then forced me out of the theatre until I
>> showed them my ticket stub.
>>
>> If I happened to have lost the stub then I'm screwed. If I take time
>> to locate the stub (it's somewhere in one of my pockets) then I'm
>> missing out on enjoying the movie. No matter what else, I'm being
>> distrurbed by a pissy usher because they took offence to me tucking
>> in my shirt ... after all, only criminal tuck in their shirts and
>> honest folk would not have a problem with ushers policing such
>> things. After all, honest folk have nothing to hide.
>>
>> Yeah ... bend over dude and you might find you have bcome MS's glove
>> puppet.
>>
>> It's wrong. It's based on an appallingly faulty design flaw (easily
>> triggered by ordinary LEGAL use) and based on a premise that
>> customers are criminals in waiting.
>>
>> So I have more choices han your limited imagination can grasp. Among
>> them, is the choice to complain loudly that the 'Emperor has no
>> clothes.' MS have been embarrassed into correcting bad decisions
>> before now ... I have no expectations they will do a thing unless
>> they see no commercial alternative (read: cost benefit). They change
>> only because the cost of doing things the same way (pointing guns at
>> customers) is greater than the cost of changing (treating customers
>> with respect).
>>
>> HeyBub, pee in your pants if an usher intimates you. That's your
>> choice. Me? If all I did was tuck in my shirt then I'm inclined to
>> tell the usher to get lost.
>>
>> Seems social conditioning has been highly effective for you and I
>> would not want to wake you up ...

>
> Ushers have no reason to intimidate me; I play by the rules and make sure I
> have my ticket stub before I leave.
>
> One difference you overlooked is that by not conforming to the wishes of
> Microsoft, you lose your operating system.


Bullshit.

> By not conforming to the wishes
> of the user you lose your liberty.


The usher will throw you in jail?

>
> Of the two, I'd say Microsoft's policy is considerably more benign.


Benign and Microsoft is an oxymoron.

Alias
>
>
 
Re: Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?

PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
> Yeah, the button you always hit when you hijack someone else's thread to
> grind your axe.


Not my ax, hoss. It's Microsoft that assumes you are guilty of piracy
until you prove otherwise. If that doesn't bother you, there's something
wrong with you and you've obviously been brainwashed to react with a
"how high?" when MS says "jump".

Alias
>
> Alias wrote:
>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>> Butt out, Alias.

>>
>> My, what a convincing argument! LOL! Hit a button, did I?
>>
>> Alias
>>>
>>> Alias wrote:
>>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>>>> In the time it took you to write your post, you could have called a
>>>>> toll-free number and reactivated.
>>>>
>>>> Not the point.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Description of Microsoft Product Activation:
>>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/302806
>>>>>
>>>>>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from
>>>>>> presumption of
>>>>>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS
>>>>>> need do
>>>>>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a
>>>>>> criminal
>>>>>> act
>>>>>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you read your WinXP EULA lately?
>>>>
>>>> You mean the one that if you don't agree with it you can't get your
>>>> money back, that one? How many people who bought a preinstalled copy of
>>>> XP on a new computer got the chance to read it before accepting it
>>>> or is
>>>> the acceptance assumed when they purchase the system?
>>>>
>>>> WPA and WGA only serve to inconvenience paying customers and do
>>>> absolutely nothing to stop piracy.
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> mcullet wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not endorse piracy. You use it - you pay for it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MS has a legitimate right to protect their commercial interests.
>>>>>> It's
>>>>>> one
>>>>>> of those self evident statements that are tough to argue against.
>>>>>> However,
>>>>>> as with all things the devil is in the detail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MS Does not have the right to kick down my door at 3 am to see if I
>>>>>> have a
>>>>>> COA on hand. Sounds absurd? How about this? MS decides I'm a
>>>>>> pirate
>>>>>> (might be a pirate?) and unilaterally pulls the pin on XP PRO after 3
>>>>>> days
>>>>>> UNLESS I behave like a good little sheep and do as I'm told (see
>>>>>> Pavlov)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem with large organisations (and government) is that they
>>>>>> need to
>>>>>> be reminded once in a while that they are not all powerful and
>>>>>> they do
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> have unqualified control (power / authority / legal rights) over
>>>>>> what we
>>>>>> do.
>>>>>> Staying only with MS, the issue is one of enforcement of contractual
>>>>>> obligations: essentially enforcement of promises.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I legally purchased an XP PRO licence and have used it strictly in
>>>>>> accord
>>>>>> with the licence agreement. Software changes, as we are all to
>>>>>> familiar
>>>>>> with observing. These occur because of an amalgam of bug fixes,
>>>>>> security
>>>>>> patches and evolution (feature enhancement or deprecation). The
>>>>>> hardware
>>>>>> environment is more likely to change as the machine ages. I'll
>>>>>> leave it
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> others to determine at what point the original PC changes
>>>>>> sufficiently to
>>>>>> warrant paying for another licence but this issue is central to MS
>>>>>> dilemma
>>>>>> and needs wide debate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MS abuse their positon every time they unjustifiably force a user to
>>>>>> reactivate their legally purchased software. In legal terms, they
>>>>>> are in
>>>>>> breach of contract because they unilaterally terminate the
>>>>>> agreement by
>>>>>> rendering the OS unusable. If I wanted to be an idiot I could
>>>>>> waste my
>>>>>> life
>>>>>> getting MS to play the reactivation game 24 / 7. I have more
>>>>>> interesting
>>>>>> things to do. However, this is the absurd position MS force upon
>>>>>> legitimate
>>>>>> customers and themselves because they (MS) distributed flawed
>>>>>> security
>>>>>> controls in their operating system - XP PRO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The definition of flawed is to be interpretted in its natural
>>>>>> meaning.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I changed no hardware on my PC. Not one piece of hardware was
>>>>>> added or
>>>>>> removed excluding inter alia, as required, attchment of USB drives /
>>>>>> printeres.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I altered a bios setting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This heinous act triggered MS's software control systems which
>>>>>> 'determined'
>>>>>> that I had breached my contractual agreement with MS: I've been
>>>>>> given a
>>>>>> generous 3 days to fix the problem (re-activate) or MS will
>>>>>> functionally
>>>>>> challenge my lawful ability to enjoy my XP licence INCLUDING all
>>>>>> other
>>>>>> functions and features (games / internet / documents / commercial
>>>>>> applications etc). This is distrubingly, ominously reminisent of
>>>>>> Orwellian
>>>>>> logic (courtesy of 1984): "double speak". The MS security control
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> triggered ergo I am a criminal until I prove otherwise. The control
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> not have triggered unless I was in breach of my contract with MS
>>>>>> (logic
>>>>>> loop).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For any legal minded folk, the onus of proof shifts from
>>>>>> presumption of
>>>>>> innocence to presumption of guilt. I have to prove innocence. MS
>>>>>> need do
>>>>>> nothing apparently - their work is done having caught me in a
>>>>>> criminal
>>>>>> act
>>>>>> of BIOS altering without their permission or consent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry. The only thing wrong is with MS's flawed anti-piracy efforts.
>>>>>> Unless I do what MS tell me (reactivate) then I am at fault. "Honest
>>>>>> people
>>>>>> won't object ... just the pirates." Yeah - pigs fly. I'm seriously
>>>>>> annoyed
>>>>>> and about to be seriously inconvenienced by a party to a software
>>>>>> contract
>>>>>> imposing additional costs (consideration) upon me after a legal
>>>>>> contract
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> executed. I have no remedy other than take MS to court.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On the other hand, using purely lawful means, I can bring this
>>>>>> absurdity
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> the attention of the media who love bashing MS and let them feed
>>>>>> on the
>>>>>> company. Bad publicity for bad practices ... seems to be an elegant
>>>>>> balance
>>>>>> of karma.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MS - I am not a pirate but a lawful and legal customer. I've done
>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>> wrong. You do not have any right to terminate my lawful enjoyment of
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> software (XP PRO) and your efforts to do so are called conversion - a
>>>>>> tort.
>>>>>> It is actionable per se which means I do not need to prove anything
>>>>>> other
>>>>>> than that this has happened. MS's legal defences are limited and in
>>>>>> context, none apply.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, how inconvenient would it be for me to take MS to court for
>>>>>> trespass
>>>>>> property and or breach of contract? To me - not much. Like I
>>>>>> said, I
>>>>>> need
>>>>>> only prove MS has interfered with the lawful enjoyment of my software
>>>>>> licence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why not just call MS and sort it out? Well, I've done nothing wrong.
>>>>>> I've
>>>>>> paid for the licence. Phone calls aren't free nor is my time or the
>>>>>> inconvenience to me. I anticipate I may make a few adjustments to
>>>>>> BIOS
>>>>>> settings / hardware configuration (swapping SATA drives in / out
>>>>>> etc) ...
>>>>>> system performance tweaking. If i activate then I will be forced to
>>>>>> call
>>>>>> MS
>>>>>> (big brother) to calm them down and get their OK to live a normal
>>>>>> life.
>>>>>> Good grief ... people have become too hesitant to speak out against
>>>>>> absurd
>>>>>> commercial practices that intrude too far into our lives. I'm not a
>>>>>> sheep
>>>>>> nor an evangelist ... just one annoyed customer who has finally had
>>>>>> enough
>>>>>> of this crap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Game on MS ... I'm not happy and I do not appreciate being
>>>>>> inconvenienced
>>>>>> without due cause.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Watch this space ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike
>>>>>> Australia

>
 
Back
Top