____/ Robert Newson on Monday 30 July 2007 10:24 : \____
> spike1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>>>Microsoft To Fine Retail Stores $250,000 For Offering XP
>>
>> Under what "law" would this be possible?
>
> Contract Law?
>
>> If the XP has been bought in bulk to ensure supply after the cutoff,
>> microsoft has no more rights to it than any other software company that
>> sells installation media.
>
> When MS sells /LICENCES/ for installation and use of their software for a
> reseller to sell on, they can put whatever terms they want into the contract
> for the sale of those licences to which agreement must be made by the
> reseller if they wish to be able to do so - there may be talks over the
> terms, but they will be agreed and signed. If one term is that MS can
> specify a termination date, so that licences can't be sold after that date,
> then on agreement, you can't sell them after that date, even if you have
> them sitting around.
>
> Just like the permits required by a coach operator to pick up from the
> terminals at Heathrow airport in London. They (BAA) recently incresed in
> price by over 400% and at the same time, the new prepaid vouchers (which
> have a bulk price reduction over cash) now have an expiry date. BAA have
> said that after the expiry date, those vouchers for which a coach operator
> has paid, can no longer be used.
>
> MS could quite easily have put such a clause into their XP licence resale
> contracts, along with a penalty clause (often in contracts I hear about, eg
> when comeone contracts to build something, if they go over the projected
> time for completion, they'll be fined) for $250,000 if sold after the
> "expiry" date.
>
> The fact thta the public /want/ XP not Vista is then putting the reseller
> into the situation whereby they may have the stock that the buyer wants, but
> is not allowed to sell it, and the stock they can sell is *NOT* wanted. All
> the better for Linux, as giving the public what they want through XP would
> be the same as offering Linux - MS could remove their ability to buy Windwos
> Licences at a much reduced cost - so offering Linux may not seem such a bad
> deal after all. Perhaps this is what Dell has worked out?
I have just corresponded with someone who should know about this, but I'm told
that the above is very unlikely to be truth (the fine mentioned in the
article). Your points make a lot of sense though.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | Previous signature has been conceded
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
