Slashdot Log In
Used Microsoft Licenses For Sale
Posted by
CowboyNeal
on Thu Nov 10, 2005 08:55 PM
from the second-time-around dept.
from the second-time-around dept.
An anonymous reader writes "A secondhand dealer in Britain has been given the green light by Microsoft to resell software licenses from insolvent or downsizing companies, ZDNet is reporting. The reseller, Disclic, is legally allowed to sell the licenses at a discounted rate of between 20 percent to 50 percent, much lower than Microsoft's resellers. Partners of the software giant have expressed unhappiness over the issue as it undercuts their business. "I've never heard the like, and I am stunned," said Gordon Davies, the commercial director of Microsoft reseller Compusys. "This is clearly going to take away revenue from the channel and from Microsoft," he said."
Related Stories
[+]
Microsoft Software for Sale, Slightly Used 159 comments
Alsee writes "The Register reports that recent UK business Discount-Licensing.com has been having booming growth reselling pre-owned Microsoft software licenses 20-50% below retail, after spotting the opportunity in Microsoft's licensing terms and Britain's insolvency laws for insolvent and downsizing businesses. Sorry, no discount personal OS resales, corporate bulk resales only."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
great (Score:5, Informative)
Re:great (Score:5, Funny)
why would you buy them with so many people giving away used ones today?
Parent
Nah.. not for me (Score:5, Funny)
Unless it was a rare classic, then I might buy it.
Parent
I will not buy this mp3 (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Predatory Pricing? No. (Score:3, Insightful)
This situation makes me think of the whole (wrong) idea of predatory pricing. It doesn't exist. [educationreport.org] In 1904, Henry Dow exported bromine to Germany, to sell at a price far below the cartels. The cartels decided to drop their price below cost to destroy Dow's business. Dow bought their sub-cost Bromine and resold it to the German market at a hefty pricing.
This deal is good for budget-conscious consumers and will only be a blip for most resellers. There are numerous ways for them to compete. Whining to Microsoft is not an answer.
Re:Predatory Pricing? No. (Score:2)
Predatory pricing does exist and is effective in the right circumstances to protect a monopoly and enhance profits. Thinly veiled trade protectionism also exists. Don't confuse the two - even if people sometimes try to talk about trade issues as predatory pricing.
In particular, predatory pricing can be
Very specific situation. (Score:5, Insightful)
When a large company prices below the market value (be it in the world market or a walled off local market), and they have deep enough pockets to take a small loss, then there is nothing that the small companies can do about it. They can't buy up the product and resell it, as it will still be more expensive than the original. Predatory pricing does exist, and a single anicdote does not dispel that fact.
Parent
Perfect World (Score:5, Insightful)
What's interesting is M$ is consenting to it???
Re:Perfect World (Score:2)
Microsoft wants to be known as a service provider, not a product seller. You see, products can be resold but services cannot.
Re:Perfect World (Score:2)
Re:Perfect World (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft lost badly in court, mainly because of the First Sale doctrin (which in Germany is called Erschoepfungsgrundsatz).
Re:Perfect World (Score:3, Insightful)
Because who could compete with a word like "Erschoepfungsgrundsatz"?
Re:I'm not so sure. (Score:2)
Re:Perfect World (Score:3, Informative)
They sold the X-box at a loss as they would have sold very few copies at cost, as a loss leader to make back the money on games.
"Is that why they decided to give away VS2005 Express RTM for free through Nov 1996 rather than charging $50 as originally planned?"
Because they like giving freebies to gain market share. Then start charging.
"Is that why WMP10 is free?"
Designed to lock people into their media format where they make the money.
"Is that why hotmail is free?"
Even
hey, you know (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:hey, you know (Score:4, Insightful)
A used car has a depriciation value. A used car has an unknown history, phyisical wear and tear, and could fail to function hours after you have purchased it.
A software license has no phyisical wear and tear. It dosnt exist as a material object. All it is is a piece of paper that has to be renewed (software assurance), for a cost, in the future. The value of the license is only in how long it is good for. A used software license that is 1 year old at 10% discount is better than a used 3 day old used Lexus at a 50% discount
Parent
Re:hey, you know (Score:4, Insightful)
There is a big difference though in what I describe above and what this article is about. Above, EA or whoever, can control the sale and price of the older software titles to ensure it does not directly compete with their newer offerings. When they feel comfortable, they repackage, lower the price, and deal. With this article, the original company (MS) is out of the loop. We all know MS does not sell older versions of their software and obviosuly does not think they would benefit because by doing so. In fact, their license stategy is based on preventing further sales and go out of their way to prevent a secondary market.
Back to your comment specifically though. The linked article does not state what they were actually trying to sell. What if it is W2K or maybe Office 2000? Its market value should be much lower because it is outdated and not cutting edge. I'd even say the same would apply with XP and Office 2K3 but of course they are still selling that mainstream. Maybe they need to fire up the monopoly powers and restrict the license more to prevent loop holes, the method of licensing, or release newer versions of software faster! Maybe they should start a software rental program or make the software web based so you pay every month instead of just for new versions. Oh wait..
Parent
Re:hey, you know (Score:2)
If you want to use the used car example, try the actual software product, which actually does have a useful lifespan (for justification see accounting rules for deprecation of software).
Re:hey, you know (Score:2)
Re:hey, you know (Score:2)
Of course if you don't care at all about the quality of the vehicle, then yeah, a $500 Festiva is definately the way to
Re:hey, you know (Score:3, Informative)
I donno 'bout that! (Score:2)
When it gets down to it, couldn't vulnerabilities be analogous to dents and dings (or major engine trouble)? I know my Win2000 server keeps hanging on Microsoft's recent DirectX v9 patch, if
Re:I donno 'bout that! (Score:2)
Great idea (Score:4, Insightful)
I predict . . . (Score:3, Interesting)
If, as TFA suggests, this is a loophole in the licensing agreements, a simple change to the already largely ignored EULA should adroitly close it.
Used Linux licenses (Score:5, Funny)
Unlikely to hurt MS (Score:2, Informative)
I wonder if... (Score:3, Insightful)
And at the same time, people get cheap software. And I don't really think this will be taking business away from Microsoft resellers - the article doesn't mention it, but I assume this second-hand software won't come with any of the additional support bundled with new programmes.
First Sale (Score:5, Informative)
District courts in California and Texas have issued decisions applying the doctrine of first sale for bundled computer software in Softman v. Adobe (2001) and Novell, Inc. v. CPU Distrib., Inc. (2000) even if the software contains a EULA prohibiting resale.
M$ can grumble all they want, but (at least for some of us) reselling Windows is a legal right regardless of the contents of the EULA.
Re:First Sale (Score:2, Informative)
I know most of the hardware resellers (Dell, HP, etc.) affix the license sticker (pretty much permanently) to the case. When I asked a rep at Dell if I could take a copy of Windows 2000 Pro off of one laptop and install it on another (that had come with ME), I was told this violated the licensing agreement.
On the other hand, I've heard that it's legal to transfer a retail copy from one machine to another s
RTFA (Score:2)
-everphilski-
Re:First Sale (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Federal Jurisdictions (Score:3, Interesting)
reselling Windows is a legal right regardless of the contents of the EULA
No. Reselling Windows is explicitly a legal right regardless of the contents of the EULA in those jurisdictions that have ruled so. A federal district court decision is binding only in that district. A district may be anywhere from a fourth to a wh
Market Balance (Score:3, Insightful)
Cry me a River (Score:4, Funny)
"I don't like it because our competition is selling the product for less than we are. That will cut into our profits. How do people expect me to keep fuel in my Hummer and my Lear jet in the air? It's not fair!"
the real question is why did ms allow it? (Score:2)
i see several possibilities
1: ms thought this would end up being allowed by uk law whether they liked it or not and decided to do a deal before it wen't to court.
2: they wanted to hurt existing resellers who were being disloyal
3: they wanted to provide a kickback to someone.
large scale of what has existed for years (Score:4, Informative)
This is simply large scale with MS's blessing. Others have been doing it anyways and telling MS to f themselves for years.
I bought 4 copies to sell with laptops I rebuild/recondition. Microsoft would call me a pirate/evil person but I really dont give a rats ass what they think. They register, validate perfectly and have the magical feel-good sticker with install key. That's all I care about and that is also all the people I sell the laptops to care about.
This is old news (Score:5, Insightful)
non-transferable (Score:2)
Disclic Ltd Website (Score:2, Informative)
URL: http://www.discount-licensing.com/ [discount-licensing.com]
There is also a more in-depth article on the topic here:
URL: http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2005/11/10/outla
Vista vs. XP vs. 2000 (Score:2, Insightful)
Furthermore, these "used" licenses would allow MS to compete with other low cost operating systems. Granted, MS would not make anything of the sale, but since they will be making mad money lute from their future subscription services, they should be able to maintain a profit...maybe
There's a lucrative market... (Score:2)
Vendor Lock In... (Score:2, Insightful)
Another supply and demand observation (Score:2)
"I've never heard the like, and I am stunned," said Gordon Davies, the commercial director of Microsoft reseller Compusys. "This is clearly going to take away revenue from the channel and from Microsoft," he said.
And there you have another problem when you deal with a monopoly. We know it's bad for software, but it's also bad for business. One entity makes the rules - there is no appeal, and no other supplier if you disagree.
Licencing and reselling (Score:4, Interesting)
However, it is important to note that licence is not a simple product like a TV screen or a fruit.
Here are three reasons:
1. Lets say a licence was bought discounted as part of a non-profit or educational licence pack (schools, universities, organizations..). Such a licence should not be resold to a business entity or a private user.
2. A licence bares commitments by the client, more than most products. For example, you are not allowed to share the product freely, or copy it. (maybe not only because of licencing issues but also because of such). In some cases, a licence allows the use of a product only to a specific person, or under specific terms (specific hardware, environment). For example, not allowing the use of a product by non-development personnel. Not allowing the use of a product on a multiple CPU computers, etc...
3. Partly like #2, licencing sometimes are regional. Some people suggest that if its allowed in the UK for now, it should be open to international trade as well. Well.. not necessarily. For example, some licences are regional. Sometimes for good reason (allowing 3rd world countries the use of software that is very expensive for them if they had to buy it in other countries). OR limits of technology/security export. Sometimes cross-border trading has to be limited. That is true - noone likes to be limited, but sometimes there might be a good reason to accept such limitation
Can't think of any other differences for now, but those two demonstrate in my opinion why there are some differences with licencing.
With that said, reselling of a licence under the same obligations/terms as the original purchase is something I think is very right and just and should be implemented world-wide.
Just my 2 cents.
Poor Davies (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, according to Microsoft, it's within the parameters of the license agreement and MS has OK'ed the selling. So Davies is just pissed off because somebody can undercut him. Booo hoo.
reality (Score:2, Informative)
"I've never heard the like, and I am stunned," said Gordon Davies, the commercial director of Microsoft reseller Compusys. "This is clearly going to take away revenue from the channel and from Microsoft," he said."
Ok I see this taking money from the reselling partners..
However Microsoft will be seeing $$$ signs.. Why well those extra licenses will end up on computers that likely have no more support. Therefore Microsoft stands to make a Significant amount of money at 200-250 per occurrence.
If
Wah! (Score:2)
WTF? Who cares?
Well hey (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:legallyallowed to sell the licenses at discount (Score:2)
I mean, what do you have against elderberry wine?