Timeline for How to deal with an answer which suggest "Windows XP Ultimate"-Build from a Third-Party?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:18 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://superuser.com/ with https://superuser.com/
|
|
| Oct 22, 2010 at 23:19 | comment | added | Bobby |
@Hello71: Do you care to write an answer to that? Because that's the answer to my question, quote from the EULA: If you are not using a licensed copy of the Software, you are not allowed to install the Software... this does not seem to refer to the License but to the Installation-Medium itself. There for rendering WinXP Ultimate an violation of the EULA and a case for the crematory on SE.
|
|
| Oct 22, 2010 at 21:49 | comment | added | Hello71 | @Sathya: That would violate section 1.2, section 4, and possibly section 1.1 too if they use the cheating of validations to install it on multiple computers. | |
| Oct 22, 2010 at 21:38 | comment | added | Sathyajith Bhat Mod | Often, third party builds consists of packages which remove WGA or cheat validations, in that case, they would be violating the EULA right @Hello ? | |
| Oct 22, 2010 at 21:36 | comment | added | Hello71 | @Sathya: I don't believe third-party builds, in and of themselves, violate the EULA. However, if such third-party builds use reverse-engineering to obtain the source code of Windows, then they are illegal in spite of the first sentence. | |
| Oct 22, 2010 at 13:54 | comment | added | Sathyajith Bhat Mod | @Bobby I do believe third-party builds violate the EULA, though I'm not sure | |
| Oct 22, 2010 at 13:52 | comment | added | Bobby | My problem is that I don't know if it is offending...yes, my question was poorly stated, I apologize. | |
| Oct 22, 2010 at 13:48 | history | answered | Sathyajith BhatMod | CC BY-SA 2.5 |