Software isn't generally allowed to be sold on once its purchased at retail level so whether its OEM or otherwise shouldn't make that much of a difference.
Slowly, slowly... Obviously the situation differs from country to country.
In most western societies there is a varying, but fairly large respect for private ownership and -rights. The basic principal is the same, once you have bought something, you own it and can do whatever you want with it, for example sell it. Granted, immaterial goods are be a bit different but still...
Normal XP licenses are, if I recall correctly (?) not tied to the computer in the sence that you couldn't buy another new PC and legally install it there, as long as its off the first one. A OEM license might be tied to a particular computer, but what if you upgrade it. When do you need to buy a new licence, when you switch monitor, floppy drive, mobo, CPU, HD, cables or all of the above ? I'm not talking about the XP activation now, just when could MS in court strip you of your ownership by claiming that your license isn't valid anymore ? And what if you bought XP and all or some parts of the PC it came with ?
Another minefield here is that few people bought anything from MS. You walk into your local friendly PC dealer (seller) and you buy something (you're the buyer). The basic contractual situation in most countries is between you two, and consumer protection laws give you an quite large degree of freedom to be ignorant in many places. Say you show up in court, say the desktop colours where all wrong, the seller refused to take it back in a opened package (as stated) so you sold it to your friend. In many countries it would be a hard time for any big corp to prove that you had to be aware about all the fine print you were surprised to find AFTER you had bought the product. Basically the deal was entered before the fine print, and then the fine print is a separate contract between you and MS, and legaly binding in a varying degree, and secondary to the legislation. This would also in many countries be judged on a case by case basis, a grandma buying her first computer stuff would be likelier to successfully claim that she couldn't be expected to know than someone working as a contract lawyer.
I would be very interested to hear about a court case, anywhere in the "free world" where the court is actually sanctioning a consumer level, end user license or similar which severly restricts your ownership by prohibiting your right to sell the product as used. Even more interesting would be to find a case where the court enforces the producers decision not to let a second legal owner use it (i.e.. MS not activating it). It is likely that there is specific software related legislation in some countries, to this extent - would be interesting to know. Can someone point to such a case ? Anecdotal evidence is of litte relevance. I **guess** the legal route would be to claim that the software is consumed wwhen installed, but if it's still there, and MS would acivate it for the first owner on a new PC... The situation for a second legal owner should not be that different. Product activation, which gives MS the possibility to prove that it has actually been installed is a new thing, with Win 2000 it would be extremely hard to make a case against a second owner (as opposed to user)
Shakti, if the court says YES, and Microsfot NO its pretty obvious that in that specific case the court wins. Contracts in breach with the law are not valid. Can you point to any articles about court cases where MS has refused activation of a used product, not that I doubt that they would try it ? I'd be surprised if they can win in court. Another story is that it can take time and be practically difficult to get the court decision enforced, and that you might have to carry every single case to court if MS refuses to comply.
H.