🚀 go-pugleaf

MEB wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
>> MEB wrote:
>>> Rod Speed wrote:
>>>> MEB wrote:
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>> Greg wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:52:57 -0400, Greg <invalid@invalid.net>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sniped
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is like trying to explain this to my mother.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Windows full installation Oem operating disk (Not system
>>>>>>>> builders) can be sold with hardware,  as long a the disk has
>>>>>>>> not been installed. So, me buying or selling an OEM xp off of
>>>>>>>> EBAY or Amazon is perfectly legal as long as it has not be
>>>>>>>> installed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What cant be sold or given away except with transfer of a
>>>>>>>> computer is Oems upgrade disk
>>>>>>>> Oems that have been installed.
>>>>>>>> Oems that have Windows Vista or W7
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Where I got that information,  is from a MVP in the windows xp
>>>>>>>> newsgroup.  I do tend to believe a MVP.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Greg
>>>>>>> One additional comment.  I was referring to buying and selling
>>>>>>> in the U.S.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In Canada, it was ruled that OEMs can be sold without hardware
>>>>>>> and it can be sold as used.    It has to do with a law that is
>>>>>>> passed in 90's.    I think Microsoft is still trying to
>>>>>>> challenge that law. The law basically says anything you buy,
>>>>>>> it yours to do with what you please, it even allows them to
>>>>>>> install the OEM on more that one computer.   I don't have any
>>>>>>> links to this.    This is what I read. Maybe a Canadian citizen
>>>>>>> reading this can fill us in more on the law, I am referring
>>>>>>> about.
>>>>>> And there doesnt have to be a specific law either. By default you
>>>>>> are welcome to sell what you legally own and if a particular
>>>>>> jurisdiction wants
>>>>>> to cancel that common law right, it needs specific legislation
>>>>>> that does that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not aware of even a single first or second world country that
>>>>>> has done that.
>>>>> Got several modifiers to the above comment to consider,
>>>> Nope, all of these have to be turned into legislation to have any
>>>> legal effect.
>>>>
>>>>> in addition to the prior materials:
>>>> Meaningless waffle.
>>>>
>>>>> Free Trade Agreements
>>>>> IPO
>>>>> Treaties
>>>>> BSA
>>>>> IMSTA
>>>>> The Congressional International Anti-Piracy Caucus
>>>>> SPA
>>>>> ACCS
>>>>> CISG - http://www.law-counsel.com/Legal_information/contract_law/
>>>>> WTO
>>>>> UCC
>>>>> http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/private.international.commercial.law/contract.principles.html
>>>>> CRIA
>>>>> Canadian Copyright Act
>>>>> CAAST
>>>>> ESAC
>>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8219652.stm
>>>>> the recent French piracy Law
>>>>> http://search.bbc.co.uk/search?uri=%2F&scope=all&go=toolbar&q=piracy
>>>>> So when you indicate that you know of no "first or second world
>>>>> country" doing that, I have to wonder...
>>>> Not one of those does anything like that on the issue being
>>>> discussed, what you can legally do with what you own.
>>>>
>>>> Contract law has no relevance what so ever to anyone who isnt party
>>>> to any contract.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Yeah, normal Usenet garbage. So do you think anyone actually
>>> believes you other than those also don't have a clue... like you...
>>
>> Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

> You know, you actual COULD become somewhat more intelligent if you
> spent some time actually reading the materials related to what I posted..

Dont need to, I know none of it has the remotest relevance to what is
being discussed, whether you are welcome to sell what you legally own.

> Otherwise, anyone who sees this will KNOW that you haven't, because it ALL is relevant.

Wrong, as always.

> The only bullshit, is yours.

Wrong, as always.