Answer for:

New OS With New Motherboard?

Message 54 of 90

View entire thread
0 Votes

Apparently it is - however has anyone even heard of it being tested in a court of law, anywhere in the world?

It seems to me that people (sheeple?) are just taking the license to mean whatever it is that MS says it means. In the las EULA I read, there was disclamatory language noting that certain provisions were void where prohibited - and that voiding a given provision would not affect the remaining provisions. They would not DO this if their 'ideal situation was not successfully overridden by local laws and statutes.

Check the consumer protection laws of your jurisdiction before ASSuming that the relevant portion of the EULA pertains to YOUR situation.

Another thing that amazes me is that every iteration of the licensing agreement limits the paying customer more and more - and nobody DOES anything about it. The current ridiculous provision is that you are not supposed to install certain (lower priced) versions of Vista on a virtual machine. By what 'right' do they claim to control the type of hardware that you choose to use the software on?

I could go on - but my fingers would get tired :)

Anyway - MS SHOULD re-activate for most REPAIR scenarios - and if they do not, ask for a refund - their software does not fulfill your needs if it won't activate, and does not meet the minimum standard of merchantability...