AFAIK you can buy OEM package and it's still would be legit without any limitations in most countries, even if old EULA could claim otherwise.

it's reasonable to expect Microsoft to litigate when MS products are being traded in a shifty grey market

That's a catch-22. They can pursue some legal actions, but it will open a whole new can of worms, which will most likely lead to unfavorable scenario for MS, regarding old obsolete products.

They somewhat famously won a court case few years back against a man providing Dell recovery disc's.
He wasn't providing keys or the COA, Jus t the CD's that would have only worked with a key on the side of a Dell PC.

Judging by this article, it can be considered as a scam. He was providing discs for a fee and went out of his way to copy the original look of Dell recovery disc, which is quite deceiving.

johnnystarr wrote on 2020-07-26, 16:46:

I'm sure MS doesn't care about these old systems, but its the principal of the thing.

No doubt, in spite of obsolescence, Microsoft would be quite happy to make a buck off this hobby by selling new copies of old Windows (the long tail + long copyright). However, the result of Sun v. Microsoft barrs them from doing distributing pre-XP Windows - hence, the only action they've taken against an easily searchable abandonware site I must not mention here is over hosting copies of XP. It's a legal grey area that exists purely because Microsoft chooses not to be the grinch, but I am not a lawyer.

I downloaded a copy of WFW 3.11 when I was about 9 years old and have just been copying it around ever since. Any time I use it on my retro machines it's probably the 50th time it's been copied somewhere, haha.

Statute of limitations, yay!

Big Pink wrote on 2020-07-28, 14:43:

However, the result of Sun v. Microsoft barrs them from doing distributing pre-XP Windows - hence, the only action they've taken against an easily searchable abandonware site I must not mention here is over hosting copies of XP.

Isn't that just a matter of Java? I would think Win 3.x and the oldest versions of Windows 95 would be completely unencumbered.

Jorpho wrote on 2020-07-28, 15:18:

Big Pink wrote on 2020-07-28, 14:43:

However, the result of Sun v. Microsoft barrs them from doing distributing pre-XP Windows - hence, the only action they've taken against an easily searchable abandonware site I must not mention here is over hosting copies of XP.

Isn't that just a matter of Java? I would think Win 3.x and the oldest versions of Windows 95 would be completely unencumbered.

Yes, I may be conflating Java with some other legal issues that cover the earlier systems. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Java_ … n_vs._Microsoft doesn't mention Windows 2000, although I'm certain I've seen it and older NT and 9x OSes listed as part of that legal decision. Nevertheless, I do wonder if Microsoft allowing those to be freely distributed isn't easy PR and credibility for them. Though no guarantee they might have a change of leadership/heart in the future and decide to pursue someone pirating Windows 98.

Though no guarantee they might have a change of leadership/heart in the future and decide to pursue someone pirating Windows 98.

They can't even do anything with cheap Windows keys grey market.

Big Pink wrote on 2020-07-28, 15:51:

Though no guarantee they might have a change of leadership/heart in the future and decide to pursue someone pirating Windows 98.

It's pretty much unthinkable. I like what Trixter had to say about it:
https://trixter.oldskool.org/2016/01/11/beyon … nomic-recovery/

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2020-07-28, 10:45:

He was providing discs for a fee and went out of his way to copy the original look of Dell recovery disc, which is quite deceiving.

I have mixed opinions on that one, if you copy something that has ABSOLUTELY NO VALUE.
You likely should be able to provide it at no cost or just enough to cover materials,
I wonder how much he charged and if he made it sound like they were original 10 year old discs or a faximily?

From what I heard he only provided the disks with old hardware he sold, rather specific scenario

when has ms ever sued a single end user, living in his moms basement, using his computer to game with. or even found out about one? let me answer that for you. NEVER.
The only time one needs to be concerned about anything is A. they are running a business. B. they are the one sharing. C. what they are sharing is still being monetized.
If you are just some dude it doesn't matter.

when has ms ever sued a single end user

If they'll see it as an opportunity to create precedent in their favor - they will do it.

Does anybody remember the early days of Norton Commander?
My father told me there used to be police raids in offices, because it was so heavily pirated..
This was before my time, obviously. However, I have no reason to question this.
We still have the original NC (v1.x) with manual and originals (5.25" 360k).. 😀

Jo22 wrote on 2020-07-29, 13:09:

My father told me there used to be police raids in offices, because it was so heavily pirated..
This was before my time, obviously. However, I have no reason to question this.

I find it very hard to believe and would love to see a source on that. I'm sure the publisher did nothing to discourage the circulation of such stories, of course.

Jorpho wrote on 2020-07-29, 15:12:

Jo22 wrote on 2020-07-29, 13:09:

My father told me there used to be police raids in offices, because it was so heavily pirated..
This was before my time, obviously. However, I have no reason to question this.

I find it very hard to believe and would love to see a source on that. I'm sure the publisher did nothing to discourage the circulation of such stories, of course.

I asked him. It happened circa '87, Germany at his university, according to his memory.
They had one legal copy of NC as it turned out later on, but PCs in each class rooms ran NC by default.
So he bought a legit copy just in case, to avoid any trouble.

I have to add that German copyright was different back then.
That's what I remember (-speaking under correction-) :
Family members and close friends were legally allowed to use copies (music, films etc) if the original owner payed money for a legit copy.
That means, that you could make a copy of your favorite VHS (which you bought or rented) for either your son, daughter, brother or best friend without going to jail.
So it was not uncommon, that two people used a program bought by only one of them.
However, without an original disk set, it's hard to prove that you haven't pirated a program. Unless the other person confirms this, which causes quite some stress, unless the relationships are obvious (family members).

It happened circa '87, Germany at his university

Probably some random passing by ahole decided to inform the police.

I have floppy disks of Windows 3.11 and MSDOS 6.22. However, I think that shouldn’t be a problem to get the same versions downloaded from anywhere on the internet if I possess the exact same software in a physical format. That said, I downloaded them from a certain website that I will refrain from mentioning here, because probably the moderators will not allow me to. The reason I downloaded was that when I tried to use the floppies to install Win 3.11, two were corrupted. So to complete the installation, I downloaded the same version.

Disclaimer: its my personal opinion, not an advice.

Are Windows 3.1 floppies marked as OEM vs. retail? Are there characteristics that would let you know if you were using one over the other? When I was a kid, in 1992 we bought a Packard Bell legend. It came with MS DOS 5.2 and Windows 3.1 disks. They were branded as "Packard Bell" so obviously they were OEM provided disks. Interestingly enough, I have seen big box Windows 3.1 selling on eBay showing the COA with the statement "For sale with a new PC only". I'm not sure if these were mixed bag boxes that the seller randomly threw things in. Or, if for whatever reason, they sold OEMs in big boxes.

I would like to be able to identify OEM versions from the outside. Perhaps if there are hallmarks on floppies. For instance I have seen some with the "Microsoft" watermark, some without. (Referring mainly to USA releases)

Well, my Windows 3.11 floppies were retail. The only brand on them was Microsoft.

EDIT: I also happen to have retail boxes and CD's of Windows 95, 98, Me, XP, and 7. Also CD's of Windows 9x new versions as well as some named "for use with new PCs only".

Pretty sure I had a copy of Windows 2000 somewhere... and I also have an unopened (still covered in plastic) OS/2 Warp 4 CD.

johnnystarr wrote on 2020-07-30, 20:02:

When I was a kid, in 1992 we bought a Packard Bell legend. It came with MS DOS 5.2 and Windows 3.1 disks. They were branded as "Packard Bell" so obviously they were OEM provided disks.

I think you will find that there is no evidence of any versions of MS-DOS between 5.0 and 6.0, so I have no idea what you had.

I would like to be able to identify OEM versions from the outside. Perhaps if there are hallmarks on floppies. For instance I have seen some with the "Microsoft" watermark, some without. (Referring mainly to USA releases)

If you read all the fine print in the license agreement close enough there's probably something or other suggesting that you need to have the COA to use the disks. But who bothers reading those things?

Jorpho wrote on 2020-07-30, 21:00:

I think you will find that there is no evidence of any versions of MS-DOS between 5.0 and 6.0, so I have no idea what you had.

haha so it is. I was pulling from ancient memories and thought for sure there was a .2 on there. I see in the timeline that DOS 6.0 didn't come out until 1993 so at least I had the major version down. (way to nitpick btw) 😉

There was MS Dos 5a.