So, a couple of years ago, I purchased (with the help of a friend, who shall remain nameless) the Academic version of Visual Studio .NET (2003) at the PSU bookstore. I used it to do a proof-of-concept on a handheld application, that was shelved.
Now that project is to be reactivated. In the meantime, Microsoft released a new OS for the Pocket PCs (Windows Mobile 5.0) and, naturally, the SDK for that OS requires Visual Studio 2005.
With my (High School) son making the purchase this afternoon (same store), I bought the 'Academic' version of Visual Studio 2005, for a measly $60. You can buy it on eBay for anywhere from $70-$150.
This time around, though, the warnings on the box are much stronger than they were for VS 2003 ('online Registration is required to use the product'), and I am wondering if being technically out of compliance with the EULA is, aside from my troubled conscience, a potential Big Problem.
The software project is for a local non-profit. Am I silly to be intimidated by fine-print on the box, or is this a genuine concern? Is Microsoft just messing with my mind, or am I doing it to myself?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Theft is theft, Barry. You've already demonstrated that it doesn't bother your conscience to misuse the academic license so why should you be bothered now?
And now you've involved your own son in theft. What kind of message do you suppose that sent to him?
Is this what liberals call following the rule of law?
I wouldn't have mentioned it in my blog if I didn't feel a little conflicted.
There are numerous people offering the same product on eBay, with the clear suggestion that people use their children's school IDs for the purchase. What kind of a message does that send (obviously, Microsoft has not sent these people cease-and-desist orders)?
I justified obtaining the 2003 version since I was then doing a proof-of-concept, for which I was not charging the (non-profit)client organization. If that's misuse, it's arguably of a much lower order than someone creating a commercial product with the same software.
Perhaps 'Theft' could also apply to Microsoft charging $1000 for tools whose prior (free) version they conveniently obsoleted (Embedded Visual Basic).
I am in a grey area on the academic licensing, as a former adjunct professor at Portland State (School of Business Administration).
I didn't think I was teaching my son how to get away with theft, since his purchase of the product was completely legal. I will talk to him about the issue you raised, and appreciate your bringing it to my attention.
It's important that all Americans continue to uphold our fine tradition of everyone adhering to the Rule of Law. We will continue to look to our Leaders for examples of proper behavior.
Post a Comment