In message <OSelYnM$IHA.5004@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, Rainald Taesler
<taesler@gmx.de> writes
>Sinner wrote:
>
>> "Rainald Taesler" wrote: in message
>>> I'm pretty sure that this is an offer conforming with the valid
>>> legal patterns.
>
>Sorry, a really bad typo ("not" missing).
>Should read:
>"I'm pretty sure that this is an offer NOT conforming
>with the valid legal patterns."
>
>>> IMO Newegg clearly violates the licence conditions and so does the
>>> end-user who works with this software.
>
>[...]
>http://oem.microsoft.com/public/sbli.../fy08_sb_licen
>se_english.pdf
>>>
>>> MS never sold XP TabletPC edition separately. It was strictly
>>> bound to the hardware manufacturers.
>>
>> Do you honestly believe that if MS had any legal way to prevent the
>> sale of any OEM packages that they wouldn't exercise those ways?
>
>Can't say if they would if they knew of this case of criminal behaviour
>of Newegg. I have absolutely no idea on anything related to the policies
>and practices MS is following in the prosecution of obvious violations
>of their copyright and breach of licence agreements.
>
>IMO its without any doubt that MS has a very strong legal position to
>prevent an offer like the one from Newegg discussed here.
>
>> MS doesn't worry about it because they've already been paid, they
>> don't have to provide any form of support and once activated, that
>> OEM package is tied to one specific piece of hardware.
>
>That's just a mere assumption.
>Fact is that the TabletPC OS never was sold to anybody except the
>TabletPC manufacturers.
>
>Well, that's what causes the problems of those folks who bought a
>TabletPC second hand and not receiving the needed OS CD from the seller.
>Still there is no way to go the way of "I'm in a need, so I don't care
>for what the law allows or not". Breaking a bank because of being hungry
>still is a crime <gbg>.
>

Sorry to be such a cynic, but I might be persuaded to think that far
from risking their relationship with MS (why would they?), Newegg are
doing this at MS behest (why would Newegg buy OEM Tablet licences in the
first place? Why would MS sell them to someone who does not manufacture
Tablet hardware?)

MS have a problem - second hand XP tablets with no media are becoming
quite common (a big enough pool of customers for Newegg to risk their
relationship with MS might just be of interest to MS as well!!). If they
do nothing except point the users at the manufacturers they get a load
of pissed off customers (many of whom are likely to be fairly
sophisticated and hence "thought leaders" in their groups of
acquaintances). MS have been paid for a licence for the machine, but
it's now unusable because of the lack of availability of a CD copy of
the OS. Other components of the machines can be replaced easily enough
by purchasing them from the component vendors - only MS refuses to
co-operate.

The users in question are the kind who will simply get a CD copy made by
someone else (piracy? I have a licence for the software glued to the
machine - but it doesn't do to encourage copying!!).

However let/encourage a relatively major firm that supplies components
to this market "leak" spare copies out of the door. MS get a problem
solved, AND get paid for a second licence on the hardware. A win all
round except for the customer (as usual) who pays twice somewhere down
the line.


--
Peter R Cook