Microsoft's Guide to Accepting Donated PCs

An anonymous reader links us to Microsoft's Guide to Accepting Donated Computers for Your School, which contains humorous statements such as "If a company or individual donates a machine to your school, it must be donated with the operating system that was installed on the PC. " It's just an amusing little read that basically amounts to keeping the license with the PC. Also neglects to mention the Naked PC discussed in this slashdot story.

Comments

Yes, keep Windows on the boxes...

[tepeka]

...it'll be a good learning experience for the kids when they install a new OS...

What a crock

[bobdylan]

MS is trying once again to takeover the minds of the children. Get them using only Windows in school and watch what they will ask for at home. It worked for Apple a long time ago, and now MS is trying to follow suit. In the words of an obscure tech, "Give me linux or give me an apple"

Re:What a crock

[Mr_Matt]

Get them using only Windows in school and watch what they will ask for at home.

And the worst part about it is that they're doing it by making vague legal statements that threaten and coerce schools into doing MS's bidding. Schools have a tough enough time getting funding for things like new computers - now they're expected to turn away free gifts because these gifts aren't in full compliance with MS's virulent OS license? Do Macs require you propagate their OS with a Mac machine?

It just seems like with all the resources MS has, it could do better than making vaguely threatening statements towards schools that are just trying to make ends meet. Oh wait, I forgot, there's a link to MS's Academic Volume "discount" at the bottom of the page. Scare the school admins by making them think "crap, are all our computers licensed?" and then conveniently provide 'em with a link where they can get kosher again, for a price. Very nice, indeed.

Have mod points, would rather post rants. D'oh! :)

Re:What a crock

[4of12]

What you say is true and all, but from what I've heard, the situation in our public schools is more complicated that just having sufficient free hardware and money to buy software.

That is, the biggest real, practical problems with computers in schools have to do with

1. Set up, installation, maintenance.
2. Training (not the kids, but the teachers)

so, if I might be so bold, a very good way to do something positive rather than just complain about the Borg is for Free Software advocates to volunteer their time at their local public school to help out with those tasks. Maybe your LUG could help to organize such an effort so no single person gets overwhelmed.

If you go in with the attitude of being helpful, setting up proxy web caches, and, yes, even helping to filter pr0n, maybe showing teachers how to show students how to setup a simple webpage, etc, you can do more for the sake of free software and the long term interests of the IT industry in general than either donating 50 obsolete PCs or griping on Slashdot.

This is Quite Ridiculous

[as400as2]

It is a legal requirement to keep the same OS? I'm not so sure....

Re:This is Quite Ridiculous

[AngryAndDrunk]

No, but the licence agreement with the copy of Windows that was installed on the PC almost certainly specifies that it can only be used with that PC.

What MS is saying is that it is illegal to buy a PC with, say, Windows 2000 pre-installed, then later give the PC away but keep the copy of Windows 2000. That would be in violation of the terms of the licence.

Now, personally I feel that that's a crock, but that's a discussion for another thread...

Re:This is Quite Ridiculous

[edrugtrader]

they are not requiring them to KEEP the OS, they are requiring that if you have windows 95 installed on it, and you donate the machine, you are donating your copy of windows 95 and can't use it anymore.

Re:This is Quite Ridiculous

[donpardo]

What MS is saying is that it is illegal to buy a PC with, say, Windows 2000 pre-installed, then later give the PC away but keep the copy of Windows 2000.

No. That is not what they are saying. They are saying that you must include the OS that was originally installed on the machine, per this statement on the page: make sure that the hardware donation includes the original operating system software.... it is a legal requirement.

This is a gross overstatement and misleading. If there is a legal burden when selling a computer, it applies to the seller, not the buyer. The buyer has NO idea what was originally on the computer and cannot be expected to know. The buyer never saw the original agreement, let alone clicked on the Accept button. In addition, if the original OS is Linux, BSD or other Free OS, there is no such agreement.

You can read your own motives into this.

Re:This is Quite Ridiculous

[akiy]

But what constitutes the "same PC"? If I go and upgrade to a faster CPU, does that make it a different PC? How about a different motherboard? RAM? Upgrade the hard drive (but keep its contents the same through Norton Ghost or something)?

Re:This is Quite Ridiculous

[Shagg]

It's a violation by the company who is doing the donating, not by the school.

It is not illegal for the school to accept a PC that no longer has the Windows pre-install on it. I have no idea why MS is writing this for schools. Nothing they say in there has any legal basis. If, on the other hand, they had written it as "a guide on how to donate a PC that originally included an OEM copy of Windows" and give it out to corporations, then what they're saying makes a bit more sense (aside from the argument over whether the OEM EULA makes any sense).

Re:This is Quite Ridiculous

[mirko]

Windows XP is actually said to refuse to run on a machine which hardware has been modified since its registration, so if they break the agreement on this point by refusing to launch it then you may prove you virtually changed of PC.
So, play around with your hardware and when windows won't boot, then you're supposed to be free...

Re:This is Quite Ridiculous

[Trekologer]

Yes, the license agreement of OEM software typically ties it to the hardware it was sold with. In other words, if you buy a PC with Windows XP installed on it, the license says that the copy of Windows XP can only be used on that PC (and the recovery discs tend to "enforce" that too).

This "guide" reverses the statement to say that the hardware is tied to the software. It says that schools should not (the baseless legal threats turn that into a "can not") accept donated computer hardware unless it includes the origial software with accompanying media and documentation.

That is pure shit.

Microsoft does have a program that gives a school a site-license for software upgrades, provided that the systems that they are installed on have a license for the original software. In other words, if the hardware has a license for Windows 98, the school can install their site-licensed Windows 2000 upgrade on it. If the system does not have an existing license, the school can not.

This is pure Microsoft FUD. I actually laughed when I read it the first time. Then I realized that some educator somewhere will read this and actually believe it and get rid of donated computers because of this. Microsoft is not trying to be charitable here by helping to prevent schools from getting into legal trouble. They're trying to take used computers out of schools so that the schools are forced to buy new ones and new Microsoft software licesnes.

Re:This is Quite Ridiculous

[jovlinger]

but the difference is that if you strip a computer of its preinstalled M$OS, and instead install FreeBSD, then microsoft HAVE some ability to restrict you (the giver) from installing this spare OS on another computer, but they have absolutely NO ability to restrict the recipient from accepting the cleansed computer.

The licence doesn't have to stay with the computer, but it can't be used with any other computers. BIG difference.

Basically, microsoft are completely misrepresenting the burden of copyright verification, hoping (with reason) that educators will be too spineless to question the webpage.

Re:This is Quite Ridiculous

[penguinboy]

All they say is that the Windows licence that was purchased with the computer must stay with the computer. End of story.

So for example, I had to pay the MS tax on my laptop, and I have my unopened Windoze ME to prove it. So, if I ever sell or donate my laptop, I am only obligated to give them the CD with it, because technically, that copy of ME is only valid for the machine that I purchased.

But when you donate a computer, do you have to give the recipient the OS that came with it? Is there anything wrong with destroying the original copy of the OS and telling the recipient to buy their own (or, of course, use a non-MS OS)? If not, that page simply lying, which I suspect to be the case.

Re:This is Quite Ridiculous

[Drachemorder]

MS doesn't have to. They only need to make an example out of a few and the rest will cower in fear.

The more you tighten your grip, Mr. Gates, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.

Re:This is Quite Ridiculous

[maxpublic]

The only way in which this requirement could possibly be a legal one is if it is a condition of the licence agreement under which either the PC or the OS (or both) was purchased.

And even so, this clearly isn't a legal requirement. Making such a claim stretches contract law beyond the provisions which can be upheld in court.

Although not a lawyer in this or any previous lifetime, I spent a good many years immersed in contract law (among other things) while employed for the government. There are provisions for reasonable expectations, among other things, and this claim by Microsoft simply doesn't meet them. At most Microsoft could claim (and even this probably wouldn't pass judicial muster) that an OEM version of their OS could only be used with the purchased computer; they could not, under any circumstances, require that the OS go with the computer if subsequently sold or donated. If the OEM/hardware tie were to be ruled legal by the court at some later date then what you'd end up with is a useless copy of the OS as you wouldn't be allowed to install it anywhere after you gave away the old PC - but that's it.

Microsoft doesn't make these absurd claims because they honestly believe they're legal. They make them because they know that it'll take a bucket of money to challenge them on it, money school districts (who're being audited and would have to provide the copy of the OS to 'prove' that it's in compliance) aren't willing to pay. Everyone could well be aware that the provision is ludicrous but MS would *still* try to enforce it and the defendent would *still* pay legal fees through the nose to fight it, as well as waste time and manpower. Given that our federal government has rolled over and presented both ass cheeks to Microsoft, it'd be silly for something as local and limited as a school district to make a challenge if MS demanded they buy additional licenses to comply with an audit.

Besides, school districts in many places are strapped for cash and rely on MS 'donations' - with all strings attached - to provide at least some hardware and software. Even if the district won the battle they know they'd never again get anything from Microsoft or any of it's partners. And there's a real fear that Microsoft would find some other way to punish them; they've done it to competitors and (from the district's point of view) there's no reason to believe that they wouldn't find a way to express their vindictiveness with a school district that gave them problems or embarrassed them publicly.

Remember, MS talks about the donator in their guidelines. But it's the audited school districts that'll have to come up with the 'proof' that the machine is in compliance, even if the compliance is a crock - and if the machine is running Linux and you have no copy of the OEM OS, you can bet MS'll throw a fit and blame the district, not the donator. The threat isn't against donations but whoever is receiving the donations.

Max

WTF?

[fobbman]

"It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine. If a company or individual donates a machine to your school, it must be donated with the operating system that was installed on the PC."

What the hell sort of scare tactic is that? Last I checked when I purchased a computer I could install whatever I wanted to on it.

Re:WTF?

[ethereal]

The Microsoft statement is that the preinstalled OS must remain with the machine throughout its lifetime. This is not true.

It is true that the OEM copy of the OS that came with the new machine is only licensed for use on that machine. Therefore, if someone donates you the machine, but not the OS, then you can't use the OS and neither can they. There is no requirement that the OS stay with the machine, though.

Microsoft is making false claims here in their efforts to simplify the matter.

Oh yeah!! Keep Win in the Box!!

[blankmange]

I can understand their point -- that specific PC is licensed with that specific copy of Windows. How many schools will read this and treat it as gospel, however? Hopefully, not many. As a gov't agency, our PC's are completely wiped prior to donation -- it is our policy. Keeping Win in the box does teach kids how to reboot, though...

FUD

[vrmlguy]

I especially like the bit where they say that schools should decline any computer that doesn't come with the original media.

"Hey, I want to donate this computer for the school's Beowulf cluster."

"Do you have the original disks that came with it?"

"Err, no."

"Sorry, I can't accept it."

Alternative guide!

[sofar]

We should write an alternative guide and provide these to schools!

Here's some ideas:

- You are under no obligation to accept any software, hardware or other parts provided.

- You may refuse any (software) licenses donated since you have not accepted them.

- You are free to reinstall any software to the machines provided that you aqcuire valid licenses for this software

- etc.

Re:Alternative guide!

[pubjames]

Great idea.

You could actually use Microsoft's attitude against them. You could say that if a donated PC has a Microsoft Operating system, and does not come with all the necessary licences, the cheapest thing to do would be to install linux and free open source software packages on it Say that Microsoft might take legal action against you if you don't have the licences, so it's safer to install non-Microsoft software?

Re:Alternative guide!

[curunir]

I have a computer with a pre-installed version of Windows. It's a package deal. This Is Significant And Important (TM). I donate the PC to a school. The Windows license must accompany it.

If that were what Microsoft was saying, they might have a point...but when they say:

It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine. (first sentence of the first answer in the Q & A section)

They *are* being intentionally vague. It would be one thing for them to say, "A pre-installed operating system cannot be used on a different computer if the original computer is donated." The way that they've stated it makes it seem that installing a non-MS OS on a donated computer is illegal.

Microsoft is more than capable of constructing sentences that are anything but vague (ever read one of their EULAs?). The fact that they're not doing it here shows that they are intentionally trying to mislead people.

Re:Alternative guide!

[gotan]

I have a computer with a pre-installed version of Windows. It's a package deal. This Is Significant And Important (TM). I donate the PC to a school. The Windows license must accompany it.

I don't know if that is so under US-Law, but in germany software can (still) be "debundled" from a PC, so you can sell your OEM-Windows independent of the computer. All the EULA-stuff simply doesn't apply, since the customer makes his contract when he buys the software, and not when he opens some shrinkwrapped package. Thus the software is covered by basic copyrights (which does well enough IMHO) but no more. AFAIR there was even a court ruling for this, basically saying, that Microsoft has no say in how a software is sold on, once it's sold. There was even a case of an assembler buying used licenses.

Note that the case isn't so easy if you have to fiddle with copyright-protections (like those BIOS-locked HD-recovery w/o proper windowsmedia), but if you have a full windows install disk it shouldn't be a (legal) problem. Another thing is, that Microsoft doesn't really "license" their software here, since then they'd have to guarantee that it works properly (and Microsoft wouldn't want that). I don't know if similar law applies in the US, but then they could always lock the software to the PC and make it a DMCA-case ...

Re:Alternative guide!

[Dr. Awktagon]

I have a computer with a pre-installed version of Windows. It's a package deal. This Is Significant And Important (TM). I donate the PC to a school. The Windows license must accompany it.

So another equally valid requirement would be: Please wipe the hard drive of any hardware that is donated to you, unless you have the license for all the software.

I don't think Package Deals(tm) require you to keep everything together if you donate it. Think of, say, a printer that came with the computer.

IANAL, but if you're not re-selling it, I'd imagine you don't have to keep the package deal together. Maybe under trademark law you have to keep it together when reselling it on eBay or something, but you're not reselling, you're donating.

I got the pre-installed OS as a part of the PC package, therefore I can't split it up when I donate the hardware.

Sure you can. If you believe that software "licenses" are really binding (which a cash-strapped school probably would do), then you can wipe all copies of the OS, destroy the media and license, and donate the computer with no OS.

If you don't believe licenses are binding, then you can keep your OS and do whatever you like with it, as long as you wipe the hard drive of the donated machine.

So in summary it should be okay to:
1) donate a naked PC, or
2) donate a PC filled with proprietary software, as long as each license is transferred.

Re:Alternative guide!

[Auckerman]

"The second point is the crux. I got the pre-installed OS as a part of the PC package, therefore I can't split it up when I donate the hardware."

This is just not true. Not in any way. Right of first sale says I can do ANYTHING i damn well please with a physical item I purchased. If I want to take the computer apart and sell each individual circuit, I can. That includes not including origional license to the OS that came with it.

Lets think about what a "license" is. A license gives the licensee the right to copy the software. Simple, eh. There are two things to note here. If the owner NEVER copies the software, they have never been bound to a license terms (in theory anyhow). The ONLY time a user copies the software is on the OS install. If the user, as per the License Agreement, decides that they no longer accept the license agreement, it is null and void.

Meaning quite simply, there is no necissity for me to ship my PC with the original software, as per the right of first sale. Even if somehow the License "forces" the individual to transfer the license, the person to receives the hardware without the license has no broken no law.

Re:Alternative guide!

[poot_rootbeer]

I have a computer with a pre-installed version of Windows. It's a package deal. This Is Significant And Important (TM). I donate the PC to a school. The Windows license must accompany it.

NO.

When you donate the PC to the school, you are free to format the hard drive (I'd recommend it), tear up your holographic Windows license certificate, and stick your Win install CD in the microwave for half a minute.

Your post was abrasive and contained falsehoods... any reason we shouldn't consider it to be Flamebait?

Workarounds

[stoolpigeon]

If this 'must keep originally installed OS' were a law (and I cannot for the life of me imagine that it is) there would be plenty of workarounds.

One would only need to find out what constitutes the PC. Is it the processor, the case, the hard drive? Whatever it is - change that so that you no longer have the original PC. Then install whatever you want on it.

I'm sure there are many more ways around such a thing.

.

Software Worth More than Hardware

[yintercept]

This blurb from Microsoft is absurd, but in many cases the software on the machine is worth more than the hardware. Both the donor and the charity should be attentive to the value of the software. I assume you would get an extra tax break if you donate your unused software licenses with the computer. BTW: It is also good to take all of the pictures of nekkid ladies off the computer as well. You don't want your donation to be too educational.

I liked the third and fourth questions...

[grunby]

Q. How does the PC owner transfer their license rights for the operating system?
A. The GPL can be found here.

Q. What if the donor can't find the backup CDs, End-Use License Agreement, End-User manual and the Certificate of Authenticity? Can they still donate the PC and operating system?
A. It can be downloaded from here

- [grunby]

Re:I liked the third and fourth questions...

[Arandir]

Q. How does the PC owner transfer their license rights for the operating system?

Sinple, just sell the computer. You have the right, under Copyright law, of first sale. If the license says otherwise, the license is wrong. Unless the copyright holder has a signed contract with your signature on it, you have not relinquished the rights that the laws guarantees you.

Too many software companies are preying on the public's ignorance of the law. And I'm not talking about just Microsoft. I'm talking about Sun, IBM, HP, Adobe, Apple, and even several Open Source companies and foundations. The public doesn't know anything, so when someone comes along and pretends to be an expert, they are believed, even if they are telling the biggest pack of lies since Hitler talked with Chamberlain.

You cannot forfeit your rights just because you use software you legally own, or because you read some words on an install screen, or because you tore open some mylar wrap, or even because you clicked a button that says "yes".

Re:This cannot be true

[Anonnymous Coward]

Of course it's outrageous and egregious! But then, taking legal advice about software licensing issues from Microsoft is like taking airline safety advice from Osama bin Laden.

Same thing

[Psmylie]

Keeping the OS with the machine is the same thing as keeping those tags matresses. They are required to be on there if you are a company that sells matresses, but once an individual buys the matress, they can do whatever they like to the tag. It's their property at that point.
If they then give away or donate the matress, the lack of the tag really doesn't matter.
I'm really curious what law they are referring to when they saw "legal requirement". If they're going to say stuff like that, I'd like to see where it was written. Anyone can just say that something is "legally required". I can say it's "legally required" to mod all my posts up. That don't make it true, tho.

Re:Same thing

[crimoid]

Keeping the OS with the machine is NOT the same thing as tags on furniture! You can ALWAYS take an OS off of a machine, however you can't take and OEM licensed operating system and put it on another machine.

When you buy a computer from Dell and it comes with and OEM licensed copy of Windows XP you cannot legally put that copy of XP on ANY other machine than the one you originally purchased. Its a package deal.

Sure, you can put Linux on the box all day long, but whether you use XP or not it follows your machine to its grave.

This is a HUGE "gotcha!" for businesses that use Microsoft Enterprise Agreements. For example: say I'm buying 500 PC's and they come with OEM WXP. BUT I want them all to have W2K to follow corporate standards. I have a MEA that covers OS/Office/CAL for all my users.

I've just been double-sold operating systems (since the OEM OS cost was baked into the price of the machine) and I can't even re-use my XP licenses! They can't be transferred away from the specific hardware they were preinstalled on.

This underscores the need for people that use Windows to manage their licenses carefully. Either use a MEA and order machines without OEM OSs OR manage and track all of your OEM licenses carefully and make plans accordingly.

With regard to WinXP

[Rude Turnip]

This might be a bit offtopic, but while we're talking about Windows "licenses":

If I were to sell or donate my PC to someone else and that PC has XP installed (which I activated using my name), what must I do to dissociate my name from that activated copy/serial number?

Re:With regard to WinXP

[gmhowell]

It's more insidious than that. Reread the page linked to at the top of the article. It says to transfer the license pursuant to the terms in the EULA. Now, go reread the EULA. On the last few that I have read (mostly NT 4) they say that the license is non-transferable.

Hah! Fat chance

[S Nichol]

I've done work for about half a dozen schools (junior highs and high schools) that have quite substantial commitments to computers in the classroom.

In my experience, whenever donated computers arrive, that's all that arrives. I've never seen a computer arrive with the documentation that probably accompanied it when it was purchased by the donating company. All you get is the computer and associated peripherals if you're lucky (often they forget to send mice).

At one school, they have about 120 donated PCs, and I think there is maybe half a dozen valid Windows licenses in the whole place. Of course, there are numerous burned copies too, which makes imaging these machines really easy (thank you Norton Ghost).

I find it rather surprising that some enterprising person/persons haven't started to produce an educational Linux distribution... just pile on a lot of idiot proofing ;-)

This makes me mad

[pubjames]

People, out of their good nature, give computers to schools to help educate children.

Microsoft lie to the schools to try to stop them accepting generous gifts that might make a tiny dent in their massive profits. This makes me so mad.

It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine. If a company or individual donates a machine to your school, it must be donated with the operating system that was installed on the PC.

Is this true? Even for Microsoft operating systems? They're saying it's illegal to remove an OS from a computer, any computer? F*ck*ng w**kers.

PC owners have to transfer their license rights to the operating system to your school along with the PC. They may do so as specified in their End-User License Agreement (received at the time of purchase) as part of a permanent sale or transfer of the PC.

Listen Microsoft. You've made it very difficult so that I, as a PC purchaser, can buy a new PC without buying a Microsoft OS. You know that. So, 99% of computers that are donated to schools are likely to have a legitimate, paid for, Microsoft OS on them. You bunch of complete t*ss*rs.

The following should be included with the donation of the PC.

Why? I'll tell you why! To make it difficult for people to donate PCs to schools, that's why. I ***king hate those money grabbing, selfish, **bhe*ds at Microsoft.

Microsoft recommends that educational institutions only accept computer donations that are accompanied by proper operating system documentation. If the donor cannot provide this documentation, it is recommended that you decline the donated PC(s).

Why? So Microsoft can profit at the expense of the education of our children? You absolute ****ing *i*si*ng i*i*tic bunch of *uc*ing a**eh*les! *an** *a*s*** of the *i*** *rd***! You ****p** **s** **e*s*s!!!

Re:This makes me mad

[Dirtside]

Why? So Microsoft can profit at the expense of the education of our children? You absolute ****ing *i*si*ng i*i*tic bunch of *uc*ing a**eh*les! *an** *a*s*** of the *i*** *rd***! You ****p** **s** **e*s*s!!!

Call it a hunch, but I think your keyboard might be broken.

Typical FUD (even baldfaced lies)

[CaptainPhong]

Some of the statements are factually wrong (unless you live in a Microsoft world where there is no such thing as a free operating system). Others are wrong even in the Microsoft world!

If I build my own PC and install Windows on it, I can give it to someone else and keep the copy of Windows as long as I remove it from the PC. This article implies that it is illegal for me to keep my copy of Windows if even if I give away the PC without it. If I install Linux, I can keep my copy and give away the PC with the OS still installed. Their statement is only true for pre-installed Windows (i.e. Dell installed it) where the license is tied to the particular PC.

All copies of the software on original disk or CD, including back-up and/or recovery materials
Manuals and printed materials
End-User License Agreement
Certificate(s) of Authenticity

This is misleading, and encourages institutions to only accept computers where these items all exist (i.e. MS operating systems). Such is not necessarily the case if, say for example, I installed Linux over the Internet.

Yes, once the machine and installed operating system is transferred to your school or institution you own the PC and the licensed software. You can upgrade via Microsoft Academic Licensing Programs...

Oddly, they neglect to mention that this also only applies to Microsoft software. What if the donated computer is a Mac?

These sorts of things are like Halloween documents that MS makes public INTENTIONALLY! You'd think they'd raise some eyebrows at the DOJ.

Re:This cannot be true

[ahrenritter]

It is a subtle twisting of the truth. The law says that you should not violate the license agreement of the OS you are using. There are two ways the license agreement could easily be violated in the case of a donated PC.
1. The person who donated the PC kept the OS that was originally installed on it, and is still using that OS on a different machine.
This is a violation because OEM licenses specifically state that the OS is only licensed for the original computer it was installed on.
2. The person upgraded the OS on the donated PC, but did not give you all of the appropriate materials required to legally transfer the license of the new OS.
An example of this is: Person A buys a computer with Microsoft Windows® CEMeNT on it and later upgrades the computer to have Microsoft Windows® eXPlode. They then donate the computer to a school, but fail to include any of the documentation, CDs or licenses for either OS. At this point, the school is not legally allowed to use eXPlode, and Person A is not allowed to use CEMeNT and violated their eXPlode license agreement by distributing the OS to someone else.

Rather than giving you the blunt facts and letting you interpret the fact that as long as you have a legal license for whatever OS you decide to use on the PC (such as the GPL license of a Linux distro), Microsoft decided to twist the truth to make schools spend more money either buying new PCs (with Windows® installed) or buying new Windows® licenses for the donated PC.

Click the feedback link and...

[Sheridan]

...send them a correction. e.g.

Dear "Microsoft Education",

Regarding the page:-

http://www.microsoft.com/education/?id=DonatedComp uters

This page contains absolutely incorrect information.

The relevant portions are quoted below:-

"...make sure that the hardware donation includes the original operating system software. Keeping the operating system with the PC is not just a great benefit - it is a legal requirement. "

and

"Q. Why should a donor include the operating system with their PC donation? A. It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine. If a company or individual donates a machine to your school, it must be donated with the operating system that was installed on the PC."

There is no such legal requirement. The only legal requirement is that the OS on the donated PC at the time of the donation must be a legally licensed copy and that the licence (and any media etc.) are transferred with the PC.

It is perfectly legal to deinstall the pre-installed operating system and replace it prior to donating provided that the donation includes any necessary license for the OS (and other software) included on the PC. Your page is (deliberately?) misleading on this point. I presume that this is to discourage the use of non-Microsoft (since who elses OS currently gets pre-installed by OEMs?) operating systems within schools.

I look forward to the page being corrected.

Regards

Silly, silly Microsoft

[mark_space2001]

Q. Why should a donor include the operating system with their PC donation?

A. It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine. If a company or individual donates a machine to your school, it must be donated with the operating system that was installed on the PC.

*sigh* More Microsoft FUD. I don't remember that requirement being stated when I bought any PCs, I wouldn't have bought them if it was, and I doubt I'm bound by it now.

Let's face it, 50% of the pre-installed software doesn't last 5 minutes after I get it home (AOL, etc.) And after about 2 years, I've usually removed it all anyway and upgraded. I don't keep original install disks after that, they just clutter up the place. How could MS infringe on my right to use the computer in the very reasonable manner, when they themselves sell every kind of software updrade immaginable?

Sure, I can't go buy a copy of Windows XP, install it, then "donate" the computer but keep my purchase to install again. But that's not what MS is saying here. This article is just another bad PR story waiting to trip MS up. What are those guys thinking? Not much, is my guess.

If you want to donate a PC, my recomendation would be to erase the HD(s), then remove all the drives from the system. Then donate the parts to a school. Tell them it's parts, and you don't know where they came from. If the teachers can't put it back together, then I bet the students can.

Self-contradictory advice

[kindbud]

Q. Why should a donor include the operating system with their PC donation?
A. It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine. If a company or individual donates a machine to your school, it must be donated with the operating system that was installed on the PC.

Ok, that sounds pretty dubious, but let's accept it for the sake of argument. Now on to the contradiction:

Q. Can I upgrade the operating system on a donated machine?
A. Yes, once the machine and installed operating system is transferred to your school or institution you own the PC and the licensed software. You can upgrade via Microsoft Academic Licensing Programs: Microsoft School Agreement Subscription, Microsoft Campus Agreement Subscription, Microsoft Academic Open or Microsoft Academic Select. Contact your preferred Microsoft Authorized Education Reseller for details.

OK, so which is it? Does the school license the software on the used PC, or do they own it?

If they own it, what was the status of ownership by the donor, prior to the donation? Did the owner own it? If he owned it, then he does not have to transfer it with the PC, since it is his property to do with as he sees fit. If he did not own it, how come the school becomes the owner when they accept transfer of the license from the donor? Does this mean we can "launder" EULA's by donating each other the PCs we wish to buy? Seems like receiving a donated OS with a donated PC is the way to own the OS instead of just becoming a licensee.

"Legal requirement"?

[mgkimsal2]

It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine. If a company or individual donates a machine to your school, it must be donated with the operating system that was installed on the PC.

Which law states this? A state law? Federal law? Decree of the UN?

What if I donate PCs that I built myself without an OS "installed"?

A "legal requirement" sounds very much like a scare tactic. If anything, you'd think they'd want the opposite - they'd want a school to get a bunch of PCs, but then REPURCHASE more Windows licenses 'just to be sure', upping MS' sales.

They pretty much get a sale for every PC in the US now anyway. I'd be interested to know what their license sales are per year vs the number of PCs sold that year. I've a hunch Windows license sales may be higher than PC sales.

Site licenses?

[st0rmshad0w]

I'm sorry, if my educational institution is site licensed for all the MS OS's we use, I'll take any machine thats useful, OEM OS with it or not.

Hm

[zapfie]

Hold on.. so Windows sold on Ebay (e.g. transferring your licence to another user) gets Microsoft pissed enough to start demanding they be pulled off the listings, but giving your Windows copy to schools (e.g. transferring your licence to another user) is fine by them? Am I missing something?

Microsoft cares, really

[smoondog]

Microsoft recommends that educational institutions only accept computer donations that are accompanied by proper operating system documentation. If the donor cannot provide this documentation, it is recommended that you decline the donated PC(s).

Says:

We like the idea of you donating, but we really don't want to donate ourselves. We do care, we really do. But remember an undocumented computer is worse than no computer.

-Sean

About "legally required"

[pangur]

I am a landlord, and I own a two-family house. Recently online I found a guide written by a lawyer on how to be a landlord in my state. It is very well written, and one of the ideas that I got was this,

If you say that something is the law, and it isn't, the tenant can sue you for treble damages.

If you don't de-lead your house, and you let children under six live there, and you say to the tenant, "Oh, I'm exempt from de-leading because of this special provision / grandfather clause", then the tenant can sue you for misrepresenting the law.

So, I'm tempted to wonder if Microsoft can legally dole out legal advise that is prima facie incorrect and misleading. I would suggest the Microsoft's legal department take a look at the FUD for liability purposes.

If it can happen to me, it should be able to happen to Microsoft.

And What Pray Tell Is The Origional PC?

[HiyaPower]

Consider the following:

1) Take a machine install windows on it.

2) Take machine of #1 apart, evenly divide parts into two piles.

3) Put enough extra parts into each pile to make a complete machine.

4) Reassemble the 2 machines.

Now, which machine is the origional one? The one that got the hard drive, but not the processor? The one that got the floppy? Or have you just created 2 liscenses since each machine has equal claim to being the origional machine. This posture on the part of M$ is legally dubious, counter-productive and a total crock.

My email to Microsoft...

[PoiBoy]

Hi,

I have a question. A couple of years ago I purchased a computer with Windows NT preinstalled, and the first thing I did was reformat the hard drive and install Linux instead. I have purchased a new computer, and I would like to donate my old machine to a local high school's computer club.

I noticed on your website (http://www.microsoft.com/education/?id=DonatedCom puters) that you state, "It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine. If a company or individual donates a machine to your school, it must be donated with the operating system that was installed on the PC."

I do not even have the backup disks that came with my computer. I deleted Windows as soon as I received the machine, implicitly rejecting your EULA. Moreover, the computer club wishes to run Linux on this machine.

Therefore, can I not donate the machine that I own to the computer club? As far as I can reason, by completely removing Windows from it and destroying the associated documentation I have removed any Microsoft-related control over this machine.

Please clarify this for me.

Sincerely,

Brian Poi

DMCA violation

[DunbarTheInept]

You are in violation of the DMCA for decoding and dissemating what was obviously meant to be an encrypted post with protected contents.

Don't accept computer parts donations either

[Wansu]

These could be assembled into a computer which could be used to pirate software.

You think this is bad? MS bought out WV

[0x0d0a]

In West Virginia, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation just handed the state department of education 16 million dollars.

In return, the state board of ed sold out the public schools.

They handed down a memo saying that all students *must* take part in a questionaire administered by the teachers during school time. One teacher I know estimated that it would take 20 minutes per student, given that there are issues with reading ability at the age of the students being given the test.

This questionaire:

* Was given online. Teachers were required to have Internet Explorer (not "a browser", Internet Explorer) installed on all school computers used in this. Cute way for a monopolist to propogate their products.
* Involved asking students the number and type of products such as camcorders and computers they have at home. Many parents are not willing to give out this information, so building profiles of families by asking adults doesn't work very well. However, when students, children, are required to take an questionare like this by a teacher, they don't have much of a choice, though I suppose they could lie if their parents have taught them the importance of privacy. Microsoft was given the go-ahead to repeat this study two and four years from this point in time. All results get sent to Microsoft.
* Was given during school time. Taxpayers spend enormous amounts of money to pay for *children to be educated*. State laws are put in place to require students to be in school *to be educated*. These resources are supposed to go to education, not to (in my opinion, rather invasive) Microsoft marketing studies.
* Finally, MS made another coup for those 16 million dollars -- they were given a right to appoint a consultant to conduct overviews and approve or deny technology education curriculum. Now, it's possible that this consultant is a totally objective person who really *will* choose Linux or the Mac OS over Windows, or competing office/database products over MS's offerings if those things are better choices in a given scenerio. However, I rather doubt it. This is traditionally a large Apple market, but in one fell swoop, MS cut the legs out from Apple throughout the entire state.

I'm wondering whether this is just my state, or whether this is happening elsewhere. Anyone else hear about similar things in their own states? I could be a new Microsoft offensive against Apple, or just something that's been going on for a while, but I feel more than a little uncomfortable with it, and I doubt any letters I write are going to quite measure up to 16 million dollars in terms of legislators' decisions.

Uh oh guys, you're all in BIG trouble.

[neo]

Didn't any of you read the Terms of Use at the bottom of that page?

"PERSONAL AND NON-COMMERCIAL USE LIMITATION.

Unless otherwise specified, the Services are for your personal and non-commercial use. You may not modify, copy, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer, or sell any information, software, products or services obtained from the Services."

If I'm not mistaken, you guys have copied parts of that page and pasted it here. You are in soooo much trouble.

oh crap... I just pasted part of the TOU here...

Re:They're just begging for a parody...

[the_rev_matt]

Sorry it took me so long, it's been a busy day ;)

Linux Education

Re:You think this is bad? MS bought out WV

[ichimunki]

Yes, this is what happens when drug wars, open-ended wars in the Middle East, and corporate bailouts/handouts/tax-breaks take priority over education spending. Schools end up squeezed and have to go begging.

Simply requiring Internet Explorer seems odd, but since it's the default browser on both Windows and Mac OS I don't see the problem. It's not like the schools had to go out and *buy* the darn thing.

I agree, it's odious that students are being polled about their consumer behavior. I'm surprised this action is not illegal (not saying it is or isn't, but it seems like something normally proscribed). And I'm not sure I see the value in demographic information collected this way, it wouldn't seem to be very complete or reliable.

School time is wasted on millions of non-education related tasks, many wholeheartedly endorsed by taxpayers. Pledging allegiance to a piece of colored cloth. Disinformation about drug use. Abstinence pledges. Etc. In many cases the education value of the material is highly questionable, but the social agenda is clear.

$16 million may seem insignificant to Microsoft, but to a school district that's huge. My local school district (I'm a parent, not a student) is short about $30 million right now. Given the low impact IT decisions have on schools overall (except maybe as an expense item), I wouldn't be too opposed to some sort of quid pro quo in my own district. I'm not so worried about Microsoft products in the schools, the schools canoot be the vanguard in the fight for a new OS-- especially since that's traditional Apple territory. Frankly, I think it would be cheaper for Microsoft to obtain this demographic data by simply paying adults to participate in a good survey or two (or buying it from company's whose main business is demographic data-- since when is market research a core competency over at Microsoft?).

The worst aspect of this is the consultant role you mention. That seems to be a lock on Microsoft making sure that as much of that $16 million gets spent on Microsoft products.

Have I heard of this in my area? No. The schools here use Macs and if my daughter said they were using school time to take consumer surveys, everyone from the teacher to the school board would hear about it. That would be front-page news in one of the states taking the hardline against Microsoft in the anti-trust suits.

No, No, No -- This is Good!

[Spud Zeppelin]

Y'all missed the point. What Microsoft is saying is that if you give away a PC that came with a Windows license originally, you have to give away that Windows license along with it; as a practical matter, this means that people won't be giving away PCs with Windows but no license, and trying to keep the license for another PC -- by doing it this way, Microsoft insures that people who DO upgrade have to make a conscious decision to buy a new Windows license, or not to buy one and run another OS instead.

Try it this way: Every machine running an unlicensed copy of Windows is a missed opportunity to have that machine running something else. If the school districts are given the Windows licenses with the machines and choose not to use the licenses (by running something else), even better!

Re:Wait a couple of days? Auggh!

[Kaiwen]

If it was just stupidity, they certainly disguised it with lots of official sounding blah-diddy-blah.

I've no doubt Microsoft is more than capable of nefariousness, but I don't think this site is a case of that. I think this is just incompetence disguised as valid legal mumbo-jumbo. I'm still convinced the statement about owning licensed software would not be there if this site had passed by the eyes of at least one upper-management PHB or legal-type before being put up for public consumption. Microsoft may be malicious, but that just doesn't strike me as an admission Microsoft would make even on its most malevolent day. It pulls the rug out from under their entire business model.

But I'm just one guy, so what do I know? :-)

Re:Don't like the website? Wait a couple of days..

[Kaiwen]

If you think MS lawyers would nix this you're sadly mistaken.

I was referring specifically to the statement regarding "owning" the software. The EULA specifically, and with great emphasis, states you do NOT own the software -- you LICENSE it -- specifically so that MS retains control over it. As soon as an MS lawyer claps eyes on that all hell's gonna break loose in Redmond. There is no way in hell MS would ever admit you OWN their software. It would be the end of their business model.

The rest of your post I agree with.