Microsoft says OnLive's use of Windows 7 and Office is unlicensed

By Lee Kaelin on March 9, 2012, 10:00 AM

Cloud gaming company OnLive announced last month that they had added a free version of their Windows 7 desktop for iPad users, giving them access to a virtual Windows 7 desktop on their iPads and the ability to run Microsoft Office applications.

At the time, Microsoft remained quiet about the announcement, despite concerns being raised about whether licensing requirements were being met. The Redmond-based software giant has now spoken out, and it appears the service from OnLive might have been too good to be true, after all.

In a post on the Technet blog yesterday, Joe Matz, corporate vice president of Worldwide licensing and pricing for Microsoft went on the record with the company’s position in regards to OnLive.

"We are actively engaged with OnLive with the hope of bringing them into a properly licensed scenario, and we are committed to seeing this issue is resolved," Matz wrote. "In the meantime, it is of the highest importance to Microsoft that our partners have clear guidance so that they can continue to deliver exceptional expertise and creative solutions to customers within parameters of licensing policies."

The decision to go public was in part due to the report by Gartner into OnLive’s services. Gartner analysts Michael Silver, Federica Troni and Frances O’Brien pointed out in the report that while the features being offered would likely become very popular, they warned that such methods used by the firm were very likely in violation of Microsoft’s licensing terms.

"Organizations and end users should note that OnLive Desktop Plus may present Microsoft licensing risks for organizations if consumers install the product on company iPads or use it to edit company documents from personal devices. Neither Microsoft nor OnLive has provided clear guidance on how users of these DaaS products must comply with Microsoft licensing requirements," the report read.

It is thought that Microsoft is speaking out in a bid to make clear where their licensing policies stand in regards to running them in virtualized environments. 

Microsoft has not responded to requests for further details. OnLive responded by saying they never comment on licensing agreements but refused to discuss anything further.




User Comments: 12

Got something to say? Post a comment
Raswan Raswan said:

Anyone know just how much money Microsoft makes from its seemingly ubiquitous licensing agreements? Seems like every time I turn around they're getting a little more here or a little more there from someone new. Do they even need to make anything, anymore?

captainawesome captainawesome said:

Everyone just wants to get paid. Sigh

Guest said:

Raswan "Anyone know just how much money Microsoft makes from its seemingly ubiquitous licensing agreements? Seems like every time I turn around they're getting a little more here or a little more there from someone new. Do they even need to make anything, anymore?"

Really?? The same can be said about Apple or any other company. They are a business who is the market to make money and make a quality product. Hence why companies like Apple tend to sue crazy style companies for infringing on their licensing or patents and they are one of the richest, if not the richest, companies in the world.

I saw go Microsoft. You should be concerned about your product being used improperly and not according to license agreement.

RubinOnRye RubinOnRye said:

Everybody needs to remember that they are a company looking to make money, just like any other company.

Plus I don't think your talking about Microsoft raswan but rather talking about Apple? Apple is the company that sues that hell out of people for every little thing, even though they are the richest company in the world.

Guest said:

RubinOnRye ye your right but seriously what are you gonna do with $600 billion dollars??? tell me please because I would really like to know...

psycros psycros said:

Well, its not going to charity, we know that much..

Raswan Raswan said:

Wow, I didn't realize the Apple fan-boyism on this site automatically translated to anyone taking a dig at MS.

@Guest 10:28a--I was being at least half facetious; you can tell because I jokingly asked if they make anything anymore, which they obviously do. You can't deny, though, they they are already making something like 15$ on every android handset for almost no reason except Samsung and HTC and everyone else would rather just pay it than go to court over licensing fees. That translates into a shitpot of money every year, far and above what their patent probably (that's probably, since I'm not--nor so far as I'm aware is anyone who regularly posts here--a patent lawyer/analyst) entitles them to. I am not so deluded as to think that they don't deserve to make money, but when their revenue from patent and licensing fees surpasses their revenue from Windows and Office sales, it's a sign of something (not saying it does, but it's got to be coming close).

@Rubin--Again, try to stay on topic. I couldn't give a shit about Apply, except to avoid anything and everything they make. We're talking about MS here. I know it's difficult, but keep up.

RubinOnRye RubinOnRye said:

psycros said:

Well, its not going to charity, we know that much..

Not Microsoft directly but defiantly the face that people associate with Microsoft.

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx

Not to try and start a war but Bill Gates has given more money to charity then most rich successful business people do. Steve Jobs doesn't even donate to charity. So, Yeah Microsoft may be worth about $200 Billion but Apple is worth a lot more and they don't give to charity, nor did their former diseased CEO Steve Jobs ever give to charity.

BTW, before you go spamming and saying how I am wrong. Here is one example story that talks about how Steve Jobs is not what most would call a philanthropist(I hoped I spelled that right, Google said I did).

[link]

RubinOnRye RubinOnRye said:

raswan said:

@Rubin--Again, try to stay on topic. I couldn't give a shit about Apply, except to avoid anything and everything they make. We're talking about MS here. I know it's difficult, but keep up.

There is no reason why you need to be an a*****e here. I am just pointing out that picking on one company unfairly is nothing when you put it in prospective. Once more Bill Gates, the face of Microsoft, has given more then enough money to make up for the fact that Microsoft doesn't do as much philanthropy as they really could.

Also, in 2009, Forbes named Microsoft number 6 in the top 15 America's Corporations That Gave The Most to charity or other types of philanthropy. So....yeah your argument needs more fact.

Leeky Leeky said:

Keep the comments polite please, there is no need for the foul mouthing and it will only result in posts being removed.

RubinOnRye RubinOnRye said:

Leeky said:

Keep the comments polite please, there is no need for the foul mouthing and it will only result in posts being removed.

Agree. raswan you should listen to this guy and stop making things personal.

NTAPRO NTAPRO said:

It's unlicensed because Microsoft isn't receiving money from it? Just a thought :o

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.