That's what Microsoft's licensing department are telling us.

The EULA licensing agreement for Win2K Server (which you get if you buy the software 'off the shelf' or under the open licensing scheme) includes a line 'No commercial hosting use'. (Want to ruin your day? Go on look at your licenses, I dare you!)

We've spoken to Microsoft's UK licensing dept several times and they're insistent that the only way to offer a commercial web-hosting service is to join the ASP program. Joining the ASP program requires you to be a Microsoft certified partner.

So what are all the umpteen non-certified Win2K hosts out there using then?

This of course flies in the face of Microsoft promoting the Windows for Web Hosters program (which we have applied for but really we would like to know now what license to buy and what it will cost us).

Same applies for SQL 2000.

All MS resellers we have spoken to, local and national, have either given us incorrect advice or repeated back what the licensing people told us.

Anyone know if there's a special license for web-hosts available?

Thanks

Andrew

Why would Micro$oft do such a thing? Its like hurting whats helping them most... well, i'll never understand them...

Enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot?

This sounds like a good time to thank Linus and others...

In Tux we trust :spiny:

But really, M$ would have no interest in doing that...unless they want unix based servers to take over windows servers in the hosting world...which i doubt.

another reason i am not going to work with windows servers anymore...unless of course the client is wants a dedicated

:angry: :angry: :angry:

This can't be true. It will make no business sense for them to do this. They want to push their product to more vendors so why will they require this? Do more research.

i agree it doesnt make sense. why would they do that?

You are looking at it in the wrong way. It makes all the sense in the world for them. The license says you can't use the software to run a hosting business where you charge others for hosting. It doesn't mean you can't use it for your business. By adding that line to their licensing agreement, they can let everyone use it by not enforcing the rule, and then once they are entrenched in the hosting business, they can pull the plug and start enforcing it. Basically forcing 1000's of hosts to pay them to become a certified partner or shut down their windows programs, causing their clients to go to Microsoft or their partners for hosting.

Overall, normal Microsoft tactics.

Actually I think we are looking at it in the correct way. What you just discribed will cost MS too much money and time to do. The whole point here is to sell more licenses. They don't care if it's throuh hosting or in house application server. It's all money for them. The whole point of the .NET technology is to promote this.

This is not a recent change - it is in the small print of all Win2K licenses. I'm not sure it's what they actually intended - it seems the Microsoft licensing dept are not talking to the product guys who are pushing Win2K out to hosting companies.

In any case it's worrying that the licensing position is so unclear and we can't get a straight answer from Microsoft.

It could be possible because Microsoft partnered with Yahoo and DELL to provide hosting.

I think they are trying to run the hosting industry, because they missed their bus in internet devlopment, so now they are running after it.

Originally posted by JeremyL
You are looking at it in the wrong way. It makes all the sense in the world for them. The license says you can't use the software to run a hosting business where you charge others for hosting. It doesn't mean you can't use it for your business. By adding that line to their licensing agreement, they can let everyone use it by not enforcing the rule, and then once they are entrenched in the hosting business, they can pull the plug and start enforcing it. Basically forcing 1000's of hosts to pay them to become a certified partner or shut down their windows programs, causing their clients to go to Microsoft or their partners for hosting.

Overall, normal Microsoft tactics.

Ditto, this was the IIS tactic. Get people to use it for free, when it's popular and in use, start charging.

Down with IIS servers and Microsoft!!! :mad:

Originally posted by certify
Down with IIS servers and Microsoft!!! :mad:


Well thanks to CodeRed, its already down, really offline that is... :D :D

Microsoft's right hand does not know what its left hand is doing.

http://www.microsoft.com/ISN/working_ms/eap.asp

Don't worry.. MS want's web hosters to register and be controlled.

And what would be the price for this Microsoft Windows Web Hoster Program?

It covers only one copy of Win2k Advanced Server. What if you want to buy aditional copys of Win2k? Are they covered under this Program?

I agree with Ericd "In tux we trust"!
Never going to buy/ use an NT Server in my life! Linux forever!!!!!!!!!!

Don't host nt server again, we all host Linux only

Has anyone joined the Windows for Webhosts program and received their free copy of advanced server? It would be ironic (but not surprising) if its license contained the 'no commercial hosting clause'!

Microsoft says that users coming through Internet are like client users so you should get as many client access licenses as many maximum number of simultaneous users you can expect coming through web.
Since we don't know rather we can't know how many of them can come at any one time, Microsoft wants Windows 2000 users to purchase another Internet Connector License (approximately $2000) that will allow unlimited users to be connected.
See Internet Connector License FAQ (http://microsoft.com/windows2000/advancedserver/howtobuy/pricing/icfaq.asp) for more details

Syed Nauman Hashmi
CEO
Advanced Communications
HostingController .com

Microsoft says that users coming through Internet are like client users so you should get as many client access licenses as many maximum number of simultaneous users you can expect coming through web.
Since we don't know rather we can't know how many of them can come at any one time, Microsoft wants Windows 2000 users to purchase another Internet Connector License (approximately $2000) that will allow unlimited users to be connected.
See Internet Connector License FAQ for more details
Not really. If you use W2K's built in authentication (i.e. use MS FTP and allow W2K to control user access) then you should get it or buy as many CALs as you have connected "authenticated by W2K" users. Most people do not use MS FTP or do not have more than 2-3 users (which are covered under MS 5 CAL)
Q. Do I need an Internet Connector license for anonymous Internet Access?
A. Internet users accessing a Windows® 2000 Server anonymously, or using external authentication, do not require Windows 2000 CALs, so there is no need to purchase an Internet Connector license.Internet Users are considered 1 user (IUSR_DOMAIN) in W2K.

This is not true with any other MS Product (SQL, Exchange, etc.). There is no Internet Connector licenses for these any more, but processor licenses instead.