posted on July 18, 2001 05:57:28 AM new
"Microsoft said it does make allowances for charities in its license scheme ..."
Scheme is right!
What if, when you bought a Ford car, you got the car but only a "license" to use the engine? So when you sold it, the buyer had to pay a "license fee" to Ford to actually operate the car?
posted on July 18, 2001 06:22:38 AM new
Your analogy is 100% faulty.
In the car situation, when you sold the car, you'd transfer the license with the car. When you or I sell a piece of software, we transfer the license with the software.
The BIG difference here is that the companies that donated the equipment had a SITE license which is ONE license for the whole SITE. You cannot transfer part of a site license. You transfer all or nothing.
posted on July 18, 2001 06:23:10 AM new
Double post -- OOPS!
Reading the article, it sounds like Microsoft is taking the correct tact here -- and the one recommened by their defenders on this board yesterday. Work something out, but do not just turn a blind eye to the piracy that was being committed.
ANOTHER GOOD JOB BY MICROSOFT!!!
[ edited by peiklk on Jul 18, 2001 06:24 AM ]
