the legalities of running in VM

[gabrielcrowe]

i cant find any mention of how the actinic liscenses deal with running my catalog in a VM.

i'v sucessfully installed a specially cut down XP and V8 in a VM. this VM runs almost entirely in RAM. kqemu supports near native host cpu speeds, and also lets you copy and load the hardfile from a ramdrive. 4 gig of it. and actually has a performance increase. oddly.

not only that, but backing up is as simple as backing up the entire VM's hard disk, solving a lot of problems for me. bear in mind that hard drives are cheap, so this means that i can safely stomach the overhead of an OS in there too. less than 30 quid for an 80 gig drive, is like storage for at least 20 big fat backups.

computing power is cheap, and so i think we should be looking further at virtualisation, so, since this is only a test scenario, i dont think i'm breaking any rules at the moment. but what's actinic's stance in virtual machines? since i can blatantly run a fair few copies of actinic on one machine, for instance, with sufficient ram.

[jont]

Isn't it the URL that is licensed not the machine? Hence the reason why you are unable to sell copies on!

I must read the 101 pages of terms I readily agree too at some point

[gabrielcrowe]

you're not wrong there.

i rarely actually read the terms. I suppose I really should be an advocate of such an act, since we spent so long preparing them for various actinic sites.

but, I'd best look at them, since I might have inadvertently agreed to something daft.

[Duncan Rounding]

I think it's different story with the OS though. You're supposed to have a licence for each install, be it in a VM or otherwise.

[gabrielcrowe]

blimey dunc, you'll be cuffing me and bundling me in a white van, bound for jankers next.

"I diddnt steal it officer, i'm innocent, Bill just gave it to me, it was a present!"

actually on a serious note, i realise this, and i usually use windows 2000. I ahve several OEM copies on hold for installation into VM's