Microsoft Stops Charity From Distributing Computers
from the how-very-scrooge-like dept
Has Microsoft become even more obnoxious that usual recently? First they start driving poor schools towards bankruptcy, and then they prevent charities from giving away recycled computers to poor kids until they pay for new licenses for the software products installed on them. The computers in question were donated from corporations, so all their software is under a "site license" rather than individual licneses. Microsoft says that even though the software is obsolete and not supported any more, the charity needs to pay $600 per computer to obtain new licenses.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Solution...
Something that occurs to me: it isn't exactly compatible with current thinking about copyright law, but consider the fate of something universally regarded as obsolete, like Windows 3.1. As computers get replaced, millions of licenses have been abandoned. (And I'm not even considering any that have been applied toward an upgrade or fell under site license agreements.) If it's universally acknowledged that a Win3.1 license is so worthless since so many have been thrown away, could it be argued somehow that Microsoft can no longer expect to reap any license fees for random Win3.1 copies unless it can somehow prove that the number still in use exceeds the number of abandoned licenses?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
How About...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Apple does this too
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Apple does this too
Apple distribute older version of their Operating Systems for free, online.
you just go to the Apple website, and download it. Only the recent Operating Systems require a purchase.
Considering that every Mac is sold with an OS, your comment is absurd. Apple is not hassling anyone for license violations.
If you don't believe me, just look on the Apple website - lots of free software and operating systems.
You can even get Darwin - a server OS designed for streaming media. This will run on PCs. It is Open Source, published uner the Apple Public Source License.
[ link to this | view in thread ]