Slashdot Mirror
Windows Licensing and Win4Lin Terminal Servers?
miguelk asks: "I'm helping a company (in Brazil) legalize their desktop operating system licenses by migrating to Linux on the desktop. WINE was tried but unfortunately did not work out for this particular case, so the idea is to install a Linux server with Win4Lin Terminal Server for 5 users, since the company has 5 Windows98 licenses to use for this purpose. All of the other 50+ desktops would be running Linux and would access these 5 licenses as needed, whenever they use a legacy Windows application. I have a question about the legal aspect of using the Windows desktop remotely. From all I have researched so far, this is legal since the actual Windows code will be installed on only one computer and will not be loaded in RAM on any other computer. I see it as equivalent to having 5 PCs on a desk and users walking up and using whatever PC happens to be available. I suspect that a direct, unprepared question to Microsoft is not a good idea, so I want to prepare first. Can anybody comment on this solution or share their experiences?"
How many Windows licenses do I need to have?
One Win 9x/ME license per active user
Now, defining "active user" is the fun part, isn't it? It sounds like what you're trying to do is within the bounds here, but then again, IANAL. If the MS EULA is hazy for VNC then who the hell knows.
Looks like it's so far so good for netraverse tho.
My EULA states allowing others to access the system remotley in order to avoid purchasing a license is a violation. So you'll need a license for every desktop which will access the system.
I interpreted the post to mean just that, that only 5 people at a time would be actually using a license, thus bringing them into compliance.
I believe that is the whole point.
His question rather, I believe, is more about whether MS considers this using 10 licenses, one each on the host terminals and one for each user accessing a host. (AFAIK, this is not the case anyways...he should be just fine using the setup he has come up with).
No Comment.
Microsoft's own Systems Management Server lets you do this as well; install a piece of software on all your desktops, and the SMS client will keep track of who's running it, and deny once you've maxed out your license count until somebody quits.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
As I have read the EULA what he wants to do is not legal here is the relevant piece of the EULA. Storage/Network Use. You may also store or install a copy of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT on a storage device, such as a network server, used only to install or run the SOFTWARE PRODUCT on your other COMPUTERS over an internal network; however, you must acquire and dedicate a license for each separate COMPUTER on or from which the SOFTWARE PRODUCT is installed, used, accessed, displayed or run. A license for the SOFTWARE PRODUCT may not be shared or used concurrently on different COMPUTERS. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any number of COMPUTERS may access or otherwise utilize the file and print services and peer web services of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT. In addition, you may use the "Multiple Display" feature of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT to expand your desktop as described in the on-line Help file, without obtaining a license for each display. So if you are trying to abide by the EULA, they will need to but a license for each machine.
Microsoft sells something they call a Client Access License (CAL). You must purchase a CAL for every user who will be accessing the Terminal Server server. Each instance of MS Windows you purchase comes with a CAL, so the 5 MS Win licenses you have means that you effectively own 4 CALs that could be used remotely less the 1 license you need to run the server with.
Things get a little more complicated than this with Terminal Server, as Microsoft's USED to sell concurrent licenses for their Office products, but they NO LONGER sell concurrent licenses. This means that you will also have to purchase one Office license for every user who will access Office through Terminal Server. This results from MS's EULA statement where they declare that you are not allowed to "share" a license. Having 10 people take turns using 5 Office licenses involves "sharing".
As has already been noted by another poster, the safest position for a company to take w.r.t. Windows and Office licences is to ensure that they have purchased sufficient licenses to cover every possible PC/user that could possibly use/access Windows or Office. You then have to perform enough due diligence that if MS ever audits you that you can defend the position you have taken regarding the number of licenses you acquired.
For example, in your 100 person company: if you have some Linux file/compute servers in your server room, then you can safely risk not purchasing MS licenses for those PCs; however, if the 100 Linux users are able to access the Terminal Server server through your LAN, then even if you have put passwords on the server you would still have to purchase 100 CALs and 100 Office licenses to keep yourselves out of court following an audit as MS could claim that users sometimes share passwords and that there was no possible way you could guarantee that only a subset of the 100 users accessed the server.
Your best bet is to not use Terminal Server, but rather to purchase 5 extra PCs that are located in common areas and the users share access to---and those 5 PCs are the only computers that have Windows and Office installed on them. Then, when someone needs to use PowerPoint, they walk over to one of the Windows PCs and do their PowerPoint. In that manner you eliminate the audit risk and cap your investment in MS products.