[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date /
thread ]
[ Next by date /
thread => ]
so If I dual boot the system with very LIttle for windows, and the rest for Linux, don't add windows to my boot manager I can run LInux, and never touch windows, I am not breaking their laws as I my copy of windows is still with the system. Out of interest is this a legal requirement in every couhtry this dictator thinks he owns, Here is a real warning the more MS bully the other countries and the US government to do the same, the more events like Sept 11 th we will have, until some terror group have the sense to bomb a large campus just north of redmond, WA, USA,. with the message you have no legal duristiction in our country, neither does your government so mind your own business there is no legal requirement to use Microsoft windows, and while we respect copyright, we also respect democracy and freedom of choice, so get lost. Rather than free software being to blame for funding terror, and piracy, it's peoples resentment at being told what to do that causes terror, the next terror group to hit USA will make sure that their action makes Sept 11 look like a cheap fireworks display. and keep on doing so until the US backs down and lets countries run the software they want. Paul On Thursday 02 May 2002 23:11, you wrote:
anyone think of a better reason for building your own system and buying your own software???? The "sanctity of contracts" in common law countries, which has a constitutional sanction in the US, was mentioned with respect to the right of a given user to run its copy of Windows in a virtual rather than real machine, irrespective of a clause aiming at forbidding him to do so. Now, further food for thought in this respect has brought by a recent article published by The Register, where the following can be read: 'If a PC shipped with Windows preinstalled, can you remove the OS and install Linux instead? Well, no, according to Microsoft. A somewhat obscure Microsoft site aimed at helping schools deal with donated computers flatly states: "It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine."' If I understand the view above of the doctrine of the "sanctity of contracts", such a clause would be valid even when contained in the EULA of a given OS. "By purchasing this licence" or "By making use of this product, the user undertakes not to remove in any case, once installed, the OS from the PC to which it is applied. Furthermore, the user shall not make use of any other OS on any hardware belonging to, or used by, himself". What about that? [PWBunce] this came from an italian lawyer
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.