>If just 5 per cent of the clarity and lucidity of thought>spent justifying an unjustifiable position and moaning>incessantly in irrelevant forums was spent explaining to the>vendor why the problem had occurred, the `problem` would go>away. Irrelevent forum? Tom, how do feel about that?:-lol

Very few consumers have a static IP on the internet today. Whether it be broadband or narrowband, almost every ISP uses DHCP to assign rotating IPs to their customers every time they connect (actually dial, reboot, exceed the limited lease, etc). Some offer static IPs for an extra monthly fee, but very few consumers purchase them.If any software developer uses IP addresses to guarantee their DRM (Digital Restrictions Manager) wrapper, they'd be the silliest people on earth.(Any developer that uses DRM in the first place is making a huge mistake, so I guess anything is possible).Take care,Elrond

>Those limitations are that you can install it twice and twice only, then that's legally binding.http://www.hifisim.com/images/as2betateam.jpg

My original post was not meant to generate a lot of argument about consumer "rights" -- but was meant to warn people that they should be aware of this type of security system and think right through the implications of it before purchasing. In the case of my friend -- he did not realise the implications at all - but that is his fault for not thinking it through. If the software only allows 2 installations -- then it is quite likely that hardware problems (which appear from out of nowhere) may not only be expensive in terms of the hardware but also in terms of software LOST by not being able to reinstall. As for me -- I will not buy ANY software that does not give me unrestricted access to install it any number of times in my own machine/s. Any software provider that does not allow me to do this will receive no sales from me. Barry

>My original post was not meant to generate a lot of argument>about consumer "rights" -- but was meant to warn people that>they should be aware of this type of security system and think>right through the implications of it before purchasing. >>In the case of my friend -- he did not realise the>implications at all - but that is his fault for not thinking>it through. If the software only allows 2 installations -->then it is quite likely that hardware problems (which appear>from out of nowhere) may not only be expensive in terms of the>hardware but also in terms of software LOST by not being able>to reinstall. >>As for me -- I will not buy ANY software that does not give me>unrestricted access to install it any number of times in my>own machine/s. Any software provider that does not allow me to>do this will receive no sales from me. >>BarrySo you don't use Microsoft software then?Allcott

Hi Barry,What was the name of the company and what program was it.Myself, I wouldn't buy it if was that way.Just this morning for some odd reason still to be determined, I had to re-install my ACT 2000 Contact Management program for I think the 6th or 7th time since I have owned it. I bought the program back in 99, so I own the right for it to work wherever I want to put it for my own use. (I also hot sync it to my palm using the act template instead of Palm's. I bak up once week, and have had the program on 4 different computers over the years. I love it.)This company your friend bought from needs to be OUTED, so that others here don't buy from them, or at least through your thread are aware of their pathetic practices.Thanks for the heads up, but what we really should be doing is making a list of companies that do this, and maintain the list.I would be willing to host the list at my site for nada, but I think Microsoft should be left off for XP, since it is pretty rare, IMHO, that they won't allow you to re-install without buying the software again.Regards,Joehttp://aboutpolitics.netNews...Learning...Debate...Discussion...

"(...) Some software vendors now share database information on persistent (coff) `reinstallers` (...)"There's a reasonable chance that such a "sharing" is in violation of the laws of the country that the vendor, the customer or both are living in. "(...) it's their absolute RIGHT to NOT sell it to you if they don't want to (...)"No, it isn't. There may be a limited number of circumstances under which a public vendor may discriminate between (groups of) clients, but such a right is far from "absolute". Jaap Verduijn.

>>but what we really should be doing is making a list of companies that do this, and maintain the list<

I doubt very much that AVSIM would host such a list. They have already made it quite clear where their allegiance lies in relation to developers. Their objectivity seems to be rather subjective :)--qnh

The answer is even simpler: Don't fall for the payware hype :)

Thanks for the info Jaap. I also will be adding that company to the 'do not buy from' list. That is the best way to defeat this garbage. If you don't buy the thing, they figure out their policy isn't going to work. I reformat my hd every six months whether it needs it or not just to make it all new again. I will not buy software that has ANY limit on reinstalls. The market will solve this problem. I don't know anyone who would buy even a $5 software title that you can only install twice. There is no value in that. I also think this would be fairly easy to challenge in court as already mentioned. Windows has alwalys been notoriously unstable and prone to crashes, even though XP is an improvement, and you could argue in court that a license for software designed to work on Windows would have to take that instability into account. The law isn't etched in stone and their is a huge gray area there for a lawyer to argue the case against such a business practice. Miller

Interesting shows you how dumb I am. So that means much of the software we use is tracking our using of it via our registry and communicating with a server incongnito ie when we try to reinstall. Is that correct.Dennis

A lot of the modern security systems generate "checksum" based on the ID`s of hardware and OS install. If this varies by a significant amount the software will need to be revalidated. This is how win XP does it, AFAIK.This is why some security systems cause problems when people reinstall their OS - the security checksum sees it as a different PC and locks.Cheers

If people didnt pirate software this would not happen.It's always the legitimate customer who ends up paying in the end.Piracy in the FS world is rife, its everywhere, you need not look very far to find allsorts.This needs to be addressed before payware companies even consider "relaxing" their anti-piracy measures, untill then we have to put-up or shut-up.To be honest with you, I can't see why anybody would need to reinstall more than once a year.My current install is a good few years old, this includes numerous hardware upgrades, if people are having problems with this aspect of anti-piracy systems, then they need to look at why their systems need this amount of reinstalling.I have some add-ons that use this system, and as yet have had no problems, although when I finally do come to reinstall I hope that any reinstall problems can be cleared up easily.These systems "should" work well, put there will always be exceptions, and when this occurs both vendor and customer need to get it sorted in a satisfactory manner.Dan.

Your absolutely right, Dan. However, reinstalling your OS does not make you a pirate, yet in some cases people are being denied access to much-loved software following a reinstall and feel swindled.I think the longest I have gone without reinstalling windows is about 6 months. I dislike the steady degradation of windows over time. My current install was done on November 7 and isn`t too bad , yet..CheersLungs