Jump to content

Why does MS force me to reactivate XP PRO?


Recommended Posts

Guest Unknown
Posted

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

 

MS needs to protect themselves from people like you.

"Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

news:g8914v$uha$1@aioe.org...

> WindPipe wrote:

>> "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

>

> It's not a question of time spent or how much hassle is involved. It's the

> principle that is bothersome: MS assumes you're a pirate until you prove

> otherwise over and over and over and over again. Of course, the MS fanboys

> like you react with a "How high?" when MS says "Jump!".

>

> Alias

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted

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

 

Unknown wrote:

> The real question is: Why does it bother YOU?

 

That's obvious; I don't like being accused of piracy when I have bought

the product. I especially don't like being accused over and over and

over again. As an example, once I had a problem with my NIC and ended up

having to change it. I had to activate not once, not twice but five

times before it would accept the fact that changing a NIC does not a

pirate make. I was frustrated enough with the NIC problem that the LAST

thing I needed was to have to jump through the WPA hoop FIVE times.

 

Alias

> "Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

> news:g890r9$m8u$6@aioe.org...

>> 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

>

>

Posted

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

 

Unknown wrote:

> MS needs to protect themselves from people like you.

 

Another top posting MS fanboy having the typical knee-jerk reaction:

don't comment on content, insult the poster.

 

Alias

> "Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

> news:g8914v$uha$1@aioe.org...

>> WindPipe wrote:

>>> "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

>> It's not a question of time spent or how much hassle is involved. It's the

>> principle that is bothersome: MS assumes you're a pirate until you prove

>> otherwise over and over and over and over again. Of course, the MS fanboys

>> like you react with a "How high?" when MS says "Jump!".

>>

>> Alias

>

>

Guest Unknown
Posted

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

 

IN LINE!

"Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

news:g89gh9$b0k$1@aioe.org...

> Unknown wrote:

>> The real question is: Why does it bother YOU?

>

> That's obvious; I don't like being accused of piracy when I have bought

> the product.

Who accused you? Is it in your mind?

I especially don't like being accused over and over and

> over again.

How many times? Your imagination?

As an example, once I had a problem with my NIC and ended up

> having to change it. I had to activate not once, not twice but five times

> before it would accept the fact that changing a NIC does not a pirate

> make.

Does reactivating really hurt your ego that much? Calm down and go with the

flow.

I was frustrated enough with the NIC problem that the LAST

> thing I needed was to have to jump through the WPA hoop FIVE times.

You must be extremely nervous. With that characteristic why do you have a

computer?

>

> Alias

>> "Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

>> news:g890r9$m8u$6@aioe.org...

>>> 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

>>

Guest Unknown
Posted

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

 

You deserve every bit of it! Get a life!

"Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

news:g89gkm$b0k$2@aioe.org...

> Unknown wrote:

>> MS needs to protect themselves from people like you.

>

> Another top posting MS fanboy having the typical knee-jerk reaction: don't

> comment on content, insult the poster.

>

> Alias

>> "Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

>> news:g8914v$uha$1@aioe.org...

>>> WindPipe wrote:

>>>> "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

>>> It's not a question of time spent or how much hassle is involved. It's

>>> the principle that is bothersome: MS assumes you're a pirate until you

>>> prove otherwise over and over and over and over again. Of course, the MS

>>> fanboys like you react with a "How high?" when MS says "Jump!".

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

Posted

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

 

Unknown wrote:

> IN LINE!

> "Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

> news:g89gh9$b0k$1@aioe.org...

>> Unknown wrote:

>>> The real question is: Why does it bother YOU?

>> That's obvious; I don't like being accused of piracy when I have bought

>> the product.

> Who accused you? Is it in your mind?

> I especially don't like being accused over and over and

>> over again.

> How many times? Your imagination?

> As an example, once I had a problem with my NIC and ended up

>> having to change it. I had to activate not once, not twice but five times

>> before it would accept the fact that changing a NIC does not a pirate

>> make.

> Does reactivating really hurt your ego that much? Calm down and go with the

> flow.

> I was frustrated enough with the NIC problem that the LAST

>> thing I needed was to have to jump through the WPA hoop FIVE times.

> You must be extremely nervous. With that characteristic why do you have a

> computer?

 

More insults, no comment on content. Ho hum.

 

Alias

>

>> Alias

>>> "Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

>>> news:g890r9$m8u$6@aioe.org...

>>>> 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

>

Guest Unknown
Posted

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

 

Yes, and you deserve it all.

"Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

news:g89ht1$mhb$1@aioe.org...

> Unknown wrote:

>> IN LINE!

>> "Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

>> news:g89gh9$b0k$1@aioe.org...

>>> Unknown wrote:

>>>> The real question is: Why does it bother YOU?

>>> That's obvious; I don't like being accused of piracy when I have bought

>>> the product.

>> Who accused you? Is it in your mind?

>> I especially don't like being accused over and over and

>>> over again.

>> How many times? Your imagination?

>> As an example, once I had a problem with my NIC and ended up

>>> having to change it. I had to activate not once, not twice but five

>>> times before it would accept the fact that changing a NIC does not a

>>> pirate make.

>> Does reactivating really hurt your ego that much? Calm down and go with

>> the flow.

>> I was frustrated enough with the NIC problem that the LAST

>>> thing I needed was to have to jump through the WPA hoop FIVE times.

>> You must be extremely nervous. With that characteristic why do you have a

>> computer?

>

> More insults, no comment on content. Ho hum.

>

> Alias

>>

>>> Alias

>>>> "Alias" <iamalias@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message

>>>> news:g890r9$m8u$6@aioe.org...

>>>>> 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

>>


×
×
  • Create New...