RE: No Question with practical and ethical considerations.

On Wed, 2004-12-22 at 23:25 -0700, Dorian A. Monroe, II wrote:
> ------Original Message-----
> -From: plug-discuss-admin@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> -[mailto:plug-discuss-admin@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of Craig
> -White
> -Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 1:47 PM
> -To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> -Subject: RE: No Question with practical and ethical considerations.
> -
> -On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 13:26 -0700, Bill Wesson wrote:
> ---8<---<snip>---8<---
> ---
> -I am speaking of a personal opinion...
> -
> -If I buy a laptop with Windows 2000 (or Windows XP Professional) pre-
> -installed, it is the computer that is licensed. The license is in the
> -form of a sticker with the installation codes which is affixed to the
> -bottom. I might be inclined to assume that THIS computer has a valid
> -client license for Windows Terminal Server irrespective of the
> -technicalities that you have cited.
> -
> -It is possible that a court of law could rule against me favoring the
> -specific language of the licensing restrictions of Windows Terminal
> -Server and it is possible that a court of law could agree that this
> -machine has a valid license affixed to it. I am not a lawyer and I have
> -not done this nor am I aware of any litigation to this topic or similar
> -which could be presented as precedent.
> ----
>
>
> I disagree. You're licensed to run Windows 2000 (or XP) on that laptop and
> assuming that this OS came with a Terminal Services CAL, you are legit to
> access a Terminal Server configured to allow properly licensed clients to
> access it from that Windows 2000 (or XP) installation. When you wipe it and
> install any other OS, or even in a dual-boot environment, the other OS would
> need to have a separate CAL to access the Terminal Server. As far as the
> Terminal Server is concerned, that other OS is a separate client requiring
> it's own CAL, irregardless if it's running on the same hardware. Same goes
> for virtual machines (MS Virtual PC, VMWare, etc) running under a host OS.
> The virtual PCs have their own OS installation, and if you are accessing a
> terminal server (or Exchange Server, SQL Server, etc, for that matter) the
> virtual machine would need it's own CAL for that service.
>
> So even though your machine has Windows XP installed with a valid Terminal
> Services CAL, when you boot into Linux, that Linux installation will need a
> separate CAL to access the Terminal Server. The Windows XP TS CAL is only
> valid when you're accessing Terminal Services from your Windows XP
> installation.
----
You are stating the obvious and completely missing the point but thanks
for weighing in with your reading of Microsoft's licensing restriction
on Terminal Services.

Craig

---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss