Message-Id:	<199910302157.RAA30901@dwebs.net>
From:	"Mike Webb" <mwnews AT hotpop DOT com>
To:	opendos AT delorie DOT com, opendos-support AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Sat, 30 Oct 1999 17:32:37 -0500
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Microsoft's "Per-Processor License"
Reply-To:	opendos-support AT delorie DOT com

(First posted on the SURVPC [Survivor PC; older PC's still in productive 
service] list; thought you guys might be able to help, too!)

I have been pondering for some time about a way to benefit from Microsoft's
prior mischief; specifically, the "per-processor license". If you don't know
what I'm talking about, for some time (I think several years) that Microsoft
charged OEM's a fee for EVERY computer that went out the door, whether it had
MS-DOS on it or not. This practice is the basis of Caldera's present suit
against M$, charging that it undermined the sale of DR-DOS (which Caldera now
owns) and was an anticompetitive practice. Probably did a lot of damage to
OS/2's market share, too.

In 1995, M$ got a legal "slap on the hand" from the DOJ and M$ promised not to
do it any more (big whoop) and we heard nothing more about it until Caldera's
suit.

What I'd like to know is this; during what period of time was this 
"per-processor license" practice going on, and which OEM's were affected? I
try to help out people, providing SURVPC's to people who otherwise wouldn't
have a computer. Sometimes I get a computer that has no DOS manual, license
statement, disks, etc. Seems to me that if it were from one of those OEM's
during that time period, that it would be legal to put the MS-DOS of that
period on it since the manufacturer WAS required to pay for it whether it was
installed or not (sound familiar?).

I don't want so much to start an argument over the legality of the issue as to
find out the answer to my mail question; when was the practice pursued and
which PC manufacturers were actually under that license? Anybody here know? 

Thanks.

- Raw text -