Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Improves Its Licensing Terms

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the linux-competition-has-salutary-effect dept.

prostoalex writes "Microsoft offers to pick up the legal tab, in case anyone gets pulled to court for using its products. News dot com dot com has a rather informative outline of new policies: Microsoft will cover unlimited expenses on injury and infringement claims, the company quadrupled the warranty on its products to a 12-month length, and the companies audited for licensing compliance will now get a 30-day warning instead of 15-day one."

9 of 309 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Oh Dear! ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    If you pirated the software, then you wouldn't be a volume license customer, now would you?

  2. Where indeed? by AndroidCat · · Score: 1, Informative
    From the .NET EULA:
    [max liability is] THE GREATER OF THE AMOUNT ACTUALLY PAID BY YOU FOR THE OS COMPONENTS OR U.S.$5.00
    Sounds like you're still only going to get $5, if you win.
    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  3. Re:RIAA by Sloppy · · Score: 2, Informative
    Of course not.

    But suppose you got a nasty letter from Stacker, because your MS OS contained an unlicensed copy of Stacker's code. Then (assuming you had agreed to the MS license contract) MS would intervene.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  4. Re:Where is coverage for security issues? by matth · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually they do...

    It's called EAS.. and is available at your local radio shack store in varios weather radios. Also check out www.accuweather.com they provide e-mail alerts for thunderstorms/tornados, etc. I've been using them for a while... you're argument doesn't hold water.

  5. Re:Where is coverage for security issues? by TheGreek · · Score: 2, Informative

    Why can't MS send atleast an email alert to Volume Licensees?

    Ridiculous!

    You, sir, are a retard.

  6. Re:This is more interesting... by donutello · · Score: 4, Informative

    Geez, is reading really becoming that hard? From the article:

    In older contracts, Microsoft agreed to pay all legal fees for volume license customers who got sued because of Microsoft, but only up to the value of the software they bought.

    Under the new provision, which took effect March 1, Microsoft removed the liability cap in intellectual property suits and altered other parts of the agreements that potentially expand its liability.
    (Emphasis mine)

    Now that wasn't that hard was it?

    --
    Mmmm.. Donuts
  7. Covers Legal Fees - How about actual Damages? by fanatic · · Score: 4, Informative
    I don't see where it says that you're covered if you use an MS porudcut and you lose the suit. The article did say: "Punitive damages, which can exceed the verdict for damages, were not addressed." And it also said:
    Issue: Third-party injury
    Old: Costs covered to value of software purchased.
    New: No liability cap, if Microsoft was grossly negligent or acted intentionally.
    So there are still loopholes here, for a company that has shown willingess to use and stretch every loophole to the breaking point.
    --
    "that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
  8. Re:Oh Dear! ... by grahamdrew · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, that's what would have happened under the old system. Under the new system (the point of the article), they've removed that purchase price cap, so you can blab to the lawyer for however long.

    --
    // Dumps core here
  9. Re:Covers Legal Fees - BeOS lawsuit!? by teamhasnoi · · Score: 2, Informative
    The BeOS lawsuit is still open and it sounds to me (pdf) in the complaint that they have a pretty good case....

    Hmmm, Backfire on MS? Or am I reading this wrong?