New
#41
Actually, since it's supposed to be legal to transfer retail version of Windows from one machine to another (as long as only one machine at a time is using the keys in question), it must be possible to buy and sell these keys on Ebay. I am sure that the price has no legal meaning here.
However, before the OS - or the license key actually - is transferred to another machine, say to a buyer, it has to be de-activated from whatever machine it was previously used on. So, what kind of proof should a buyer require? I know that Ebay offers buyer protection, so that if your key does not work, then you can get your money back, but first, that's a hassle, and second, in the unlikely event where you need to prove that your keys are legitimate, will the Ebay sales receipt count? I actually doubt that.
So, does anyone know what exactly constitute a proof that the license key was in fact de-activated on the old machine before the key was sold/transferred?
In this case I suppose there should not be a problem - the keys are valid and are used on one machine each, so I don't see where he can run into problems. Unless the promotional sales agreement explicitly forbids transferring the keys to anyone, but I did not find that there. Of course, if one starts to take the purpose of the program too literally, then one can argue that students must de-activate their student keys once they graduate and buy retail versions instead. But how realistic is this?
There is no deactivation by consumer, as far as I know.
Even if you uninstall, your hardware signature for that license is stored until another one overwrites it in MS activation computers.
This is what happens when you exchange the series of numbers in the robocall to MS. It deactivates the old install and activates the new one. The numbers are a bionumeric identifier of the new hardware config.
I'm with JK. :)
Some of this illustrates the pitfalls of selling virtual products. M$ could avoid all this by selling only physical disks. Their layered approach to distribution leaves numerous spaces between the lines up for interpretation.
If their intent was that each sale of software to students, was a single-use licenses that was never legitimate for sale to a third party, they certainly could have been more explicit. The ramifications of such an approach would be an interesting debate in itself!
This was a promotion - they were trying to push x units out the door at launch to create a buzz. Inherent in any such offering is that some entrepreneurs will step up to take advantage.
A good deal of the holier-than-thou post-facto sermonizing is penis envy. Plus ca change.