Microsoft Now Allows Customers To Transfer Office 2013 License Between PCs

 

Microsoft today responded to customer feedback on Office licensing terms. Microsoft today announced that they have changed the Office 2013 retail license agreement to allow customers to transfer the software from one computer to another which now means users can transfer Office 2013 to a different computer if their device fails or they get a new one.

Updated transferability provision to the Retail License Terms of the Software License Agreement for Microsoft Office 2013 Desktop Application Software:

Can I transfer the software to another computer or user? You may transfer the software to another computer that belongs to you, but not more than one time every 90 days (except due to hardware failure, in which case you may transfer sooner). If you transfer the software to another computer, that other computer becomes the “licensed computer.” You may also transfer the software (together with the license) to a computer owned by someone else if a) you are the first licensed user of the software and b) the new user agrees to the terms of this agreement before the transfer. Any time you transfer the software to a new computer, you must remove the software from the prior computer and you may not retain any copies.

Source: Office Blog

About the author  ⁄ pradeep

Pradeep, a Computer Science & Engineering graduate.

  • JRV

    I’m glad they listened to the feedback…but this NEVER should have come up in the first place. The premise of OEM vs. retail licenses is that the OEM license is cheaper because it’s restricted to use on the computer with which it’s sold, where the retail license is usable on any PC, as long as it’s not used on more than one PC at a time. Selling the retail license with OEM restrictions was just plain wrong.

  • JRV

    I’m glad they listened to the feedback…but this NEVER should have come up in the first place. The premise of OEM vs. retail licenses is that the OEM license is cheaper because it’s restricted to use on the computer with which it’s sold, where the retail license is usable on any PC, as long as it’s not used on more than one PC at a time. Selling the retail license with OEM restrictions was just plain wrong.

    Ed Bott/ZDNet wrote a scathing article about this, and pointed out that they tried something similar with Vista licensing, which was similarly reviled by the public and ultimately reversed by MS. Hopefully, as both efforts to inappropriately restrict retail licenses failed, they will not try this again going forward.

  • JRV

    I’m glad they listened to the feedback…but this NEVER should have come up in the first place. The premise of OEM vs. retail licenses is that the OEM license is cheaper because it’s restricted to use on the computer with which it’s sold, where the retail license is usable on any PC, as long as it’s not used on more than one PC at a time. Selling the retail license with OEM restrictions was just plain wrong.

    Ed Bott/ZDNet wrote a scathing article about this, and pointed out that they tried something similar with Vista licensing, which was similarly reviled by the public and ultimately reversed by MS. Hopefully, as both efforts to inappropriately restrict retail licenses failed, they will not try this again going forward.

  • JRV

    I’m glad they listened to the feedback…but this NEVER should have come up in the first place. The premise of OEM vs. retail licenses is that the OEM license is cheaper because it’s restricted to use on the computer with which it’s sold, where the retail license is usable on any PC, as long as it’s not used on more than one PC at a time. Selling the retail license with OEM restrictions was just plain wrong.

    Ed Bott/ZDNet wrote a scathing article about this, and pointed out that they tried something similar with Vista licensing, which was similarly reviled by the public and ultimately reversed by MS. Hopefully, as both efforts to inappropriately restrict retail licenses failed, they will not try this again going forward.