Windows XP EULA Discrepancies

Greg Edmiston writes "I came across some interesting ambiguities upon reviewing the Windows XP EULA which turn common scenarios into potential EULA violations. Among the potential violations include VNC, dual-processor workstations with graphics cards, and running Gnutella. Just some food for thought."

Comments

One non-issue

[kruetz]

1.) "The Product may not be used by more than two (2) processors at any one time on any single Workstation Computer."

It seems that Microsoft wrote this with dual-CPU workstations in mind. However, what qualifies as a processor? My graphics card has an on-board GPU which is as good as any.

Well, I don't think this is an issue - the "product" is WinXP. Now, you're graphics card is not executing any WinXP code - WinXP is sending it dynamically-generated drawing instructions. To claim that WinXP is "being used" by the GPU doesn't seem to describe the situation. A more accurate description would be "WinXP is CONTROLLING the GPU".

If I'm wrong, we're all going to piracy hell, because there a processors in our sound cards, network adapters, hard-drives and cd-roms, ... you get the idea.

I'm sure they only mean processors that are capable of executing/running WinXP, which certainly ONLY covers your AMD/Intel CPU.

I agree that the term "processors" IS ambiguous, but when it's coupled with the "may not be used by more than" phrase, I think it's quite clear that they're talking about PCs with more than 2 CPUs.

But the other issues are rather worrisome. Especially #2 - "The ten connection maximum includes any indirect connections made through "multiplexing"...". How the Hell are you going to know if someone's running NAT on their machine and their entire LAN of 500 PCs is accessing your machine?!? This one IS BULLSHIT.

And since they mention IIS in their clause, doesn't it mean that as a web-server running IIS under WinXP - YOU CAN ONLY SERVE 10 PAGES SIMULTANEOUSLY.

BUT THIS IS GOOD - REALLY. We can get Microsoft to take themselves to court over this one - if microsoft.com is using IIS under WinXP (and if not, they're not sleeping in the bed they've made) wouldn't you agree that it's highly likely that they have served more than 10 pages at one time? If so, Microsoft has broken their own EULA and as a result I don't see how they could take anyone else to court over this issue. So it may well be a complete non-issue.

Still, EULAs need to be regulated so that you either can't lose all sorts of rights when you purchase software, OR the licenses is made available to you before your potential purchase.

God I hate Microsoft's legal dept...