News: Revision to Windows Vista retail licensing terms

I’m very pleased to let you know you this morning (or afternoon, or evening, depending on where you are when you read this) that the Windows division has revised the retail license terms for Windows Vista in a significant way.  Namely, the terms regarding license-to-device assignment of the retail product (including Home Basic, Home Premium, Business and Ultimate) now read as follows: 

  • You may uninstall the software and install it on another device for your use.  You may not do so to share this license between devices.

You can find the newly-revised retail license terms here, as I’m sure you’ll want to read them for yourself.

Our intention behind the original terms was genuinely geared toward combating piracy; however, it’s become clear to us that those original terms were perceived as adversely affecting an important group of customers: PC and hardware enthusiasts.  You who comprise the enthusiast market are vital to us for several reasons, not least of all because of the support you’ve provided us throughout the development of Windows VistaWe respect the time and expense you go to in customizing, building and rebuilding your hardware and we heard you that the previous terms were seen as an impediment to that -- it’s for that reason we’ve made this change.  I hope that this change provides the flexibility you need, and gives you more reason to be excited about the upcoming retail release of our new operating system.


Comments

  1. Posted on: November 02, 2006 at 6:39PM  

    So r3m0t stated we get new license terms:

    "You may uninstall the software and install it on another device for your use.  You may not do so to share this license between devices."

    The way I read the new terms they seem more favourable or equivalent to the Windows XP terms.  Im no lawyer though, and you'ld probably need  a good lawyer to understand all the fine print in any EULA.

  2. Posted on: November 02, 2006 at 7:00PM  

    I'm pleased that Microsoft appears to have listened, but that enthusiasm has been tempered somewhat by the paragraph that follows:

    b. Windows Anytime Upgrade Software. The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device one time, but only if the license terms of the software you upgraded from allows reassignment.

    If I purchase Windows Vista Home Basic in January, and then upgrade later to Home Premium or Ultimate via the "anytime upgrade" option, does this mean that I'm basically screwed out of that upgrade after a single transfer to another "licensed device?" In other words, I'd be stuck with Windows Basic unless I forked over cash to Microsoft yet again for another "anytime upgrade?" I'd love to think that I'm wrong in this assumption, but the licensing terms don't seem to indicate that.

    Why can't Microsoft simply admit that this entire notion was a mistake, and strike it from the licensing agreement completely? I was reasonably happy until running across the above-mentioned paragraph.

  3. Posted on: November 02, 2006 at 7:01PM  

    Glad to see Microsoft have seen the light.  Lets take this in the faith it was done, and people running dodgy copies of Vista, report them to piracy@microsoft.com

    As an enthusiast who has always built his desktop PC's and ebay'd his old components, this is good news.

  4. Posted on: November 02, 2006 at 7:27PM  

    I second cwysong on an official clarification on virtualization rights for each Home SKU. My interpretation and that of a member of the Windows Server team is that Vista Home Basic and Home Premium may be used in a VM, but you need an additional license for that VM instance (sicne the license says you can't use the copy installed on the licensed device in a VM), wheras Ultimate allows the same license to be used both on a physical machine and a VM on that same machine.

    Check here for the Windows Server team member's comments:

    http://blogs.technet.com/windowsserver/archive/2006/10/17/Virtual-Hard-Disk-format-becomes-open.aspx

    cwysong, #2 is likely in the license because it isn't generally a good idea to run such technologies in a VM. You basically weaken any protections you'd normally have since multiple instances of a VM may look the same (someone could copy your VM image and gain access to your rights managed data). You may also run into timing, performance (particularly with something like BitLocker), or other issues (the VM's drivers may not support such scenarios) that affect such technologies. In the case of a scenario like purchasing protected media inside a VM, depending on the service/license used your media may only be playable within the VM -- not a good situation if you can't sync to a device or the VM doesn't have enough performance to render the media.

    Finally, there's the issue that MS probably doesn't want to support those scenarios currently bucause they haven't tested for such scenarios (and can't support every VM).

  5. Posted on: November 02, 2006 at 7:45PM  

    Let's get those virtualization terms clarified too, for us Mac users who don't want to pony up for the expensive versions of Vista.  

    In particular, I have an XP site license (legit) running on my Mac.  There's no incentive for me to upgrade if I have to buy Ultimate.  

    For that matter, why not let people run one instance of Vista virtualized, even on the basic editions?  Otherwise, you're encouraging people to install Linux and install Vista in a Linux-hosted VM.

  6. Posted on: November 02, 2006 at 8:07PM  

    Microsoft is listening to it's customers? Surely this is a first?

    Anyway, hardware tinkerers and serial upgraders constitute a large percentage of the tech savvy crowd that have unofficially supported Windows and Windows users for years. Many of us provide the front line in support on how to resolve issues with Windows based machines, through forums, support groups, mailing lists - and even though just helping family and friends, which saves MS a vast amount of money in support requests.

    It would be madness for Microsoft to piss these people off - and to potentially loose this wide base of expertise.

  7. Posted on: November 02, 2006 at 8:16PM  

    This is the best breakfast that wake me up from a nightmare for a long time :)

    Thanks nWhite for your efforts in relaying our views and getting things changed.

    Now I can go back from testing ubuntu (which is great!) to testing RC2 again......

  8. Posted on: November 02, 2006 at 8:19PM  

    Yay! I may upgrade after all.

    How about fixing the Virtual Machine restriction too.  It is just as ridiculous.

  9. Posted on: November 02, 2006 at 8:37PM  

    I must say, when I first heard about the terms I was extremely upset, I have been on the border about getting Vista when it comes out or within 4 months and that really pushed me towards no. This change really pushed me back towards yes, and giving the Microsoft Vista team a human face that is listening really helps, I (we) appreciate taking what we expect and enjoy into consideration.

  10. Posted on: November 02, 2006 at 8:54PM  

    Sometimes it’s hard to simply do the right thing.  I’m very elated that Microsoft decided not to limit the installation of Windows Vista on a system.

    As a system builder who loves tinkering on the latest technological advancement and the certain pride that comes with building a computer system that far exceeds the quality of pre-built systems out there (yuck!), I have to give Microsoft tremendous respect for the foresight in recognizing the contributions we as system builders contribute to the PC world.

    =====================

    System Configuration:

    Windows Vista Ultimate (x86)

    AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4200+

    1 GB RAM

    Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe MOBO

    2 320 GB SATA HD

    2 120 GB SATA HD

    26” Widescreen HDTV LCD w/ Dual DVI (1920 x 1200)

    NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT Video Card SLI w/ Dual DVI

    Audigy 2 THX Certified Sound Card

    Case: Ultra  

Trackbacks

  1. Posted by: Donna's SecurityFlash on November 02, 2006 at 3:00PM

    From Windows Vista Team: Windows division has revised the retail license terms for Windows Vista in a

  2. Posted by: Robert McLaws: Windows Vista Edition on November 02, 2006 at 3:13PM

    Nick White from the Official Windows Vista Blog just posted some very interesting news . It appears that

  3. Posted by: TechBlog on November 02, 2006 at 3:48PM

    Spotted by the eagle-eyed Claus: Microsoft apparently has backed down on its Windows Vista license restriction that limited transfer of the operating system to a new machine only once. From the Window Vista Team Blog: I'm very pleased to let...

  4. Posted by: UFies.org on November 02, 2006 at 5:45PM

    Bitch I do, but I have to give credit where credit is due when I saw that the license terms...

  5. Posted by: Brad's Weblog on November 02, 2006 at 6:08PM
  6. Posted by: Windows Vista/Longhorn Blog on November 03, 2006 at 1:05AM

    MS Vista team just announce the licensing terms for Vista was changed, which allow you to move retail...

  7. Posted by: Le blog de LostInBrittany on November 03, 2006 at 2:58AM

    Il semblerait que ces derniers temps je parle pas mal de Microsoft et de leur nouveau Windows Vista, et que la plupart de mes billets sur le sujet sont trs critiques. Pas plus loin que hier, par exemple, je vous parlais encore de la gourmandise de...

  8. Posted by: deedee.brainstream.net on November 03, 2006 at 5:12AM
  9. Posted by: KAZ-TCS Ltd. Company Weblog on November 03, 2006 at 5:35AM

    From Vista Blog : I’m very pleased to let you know you this morning (or afternoon, or evening, depending

  10. Posted by: GottaBeMobile.com on November 03, 2006 at 7:24AM
  11. Posted by: Anjana's Arena on November 03, 2006 at 8:36AM

    Atlast the Vista licensing policy has been revised by Micrsoft today. This is really a great news!!!

  12. Posted by: Mike Taulty's Blog on November 03, 2006 at 10:14AM

    Good news on the Vista licensing front.

  13. Posted by: VMblog.com - Virtualization Information on November 03, 2006 at 2:29PM

    This could be great news as long as they follow through. The "virtualization" licensing aspect of Vista still bothers me, but I was equally concerned about Microsoft's "reinstallation" policy with Vista. Sounds like they might be listening to the grumbling

  14. Posted by: Tech Talk Blog on November 05, 2006 at 5:10PM

    One of the Thought Bubble post responses sent me on a bit of a crusade to find out more about the licensing...

  15. Posted by: ハマる生活 on November 05, 2006 at 10:52PM

    この記事は 「WindowsXPの次のWindowsOS、Vistaでは自作パソコンユーザにとって、大変不利な、使いにくいライセンスになるらしいこと」 についての情報を集約する為の記事である。記事は適宜改訂される。

  16. Posted by: Views on Vista on December 05, 2006 at 4:02AM

    Yesterday, we presented the first of five cinema events featuring Exchange 2007, Office 2007 and Vista.

  17. Posted by: La masa, el ladrillo, la bota, el bocadillo... on December 10, 2006 at 3:29PM

    Leía hace unos días en el blog de Rafael Ontivero sus airadas quejas contra los terminos de licencia

  18. Posted by: Lifehacker on December 11, 2006 at 8:08PM

    Just got back from a weekend visit to the Microsoft campus up in Redmond, Washington where I got the chance to hear about Windows Vista and other new MS creations, like the Xbox 360 and Zune music player. There...

  19. Posted by: E-Bitz - SBS MVP the Official Blog of the SBS "Diva" on January 12, 2007 at 10:36PM

    Dear Mr. Ballmer: I've emailed you before.. I've blogged to you before... I've seen you in person before.

  20. Posted by: Ms Windows On Macbook ♦ Apple MacBook and MacBook Pro News on July 27, 2008 at 5:45PM