Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?

Kinsey,

> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?

Simple : you're not allowed to sell what you do not own.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On 1/3/2022 12:21 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?

https://www.intel.ca/content/www/ca/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html

"Can I get engineering sample processors from Intel?

Due to the pre-production nature of the engineering sample processors,
they are generally only loaned to OEMs, ODMs, and ISVs for pre-production
test and evaluation work under specific contractual terms and conditions
to assure the protection of assets and confidential information.

Engineering sample processors are not made available
to the general public by Intel."

In effect, you're in possession of stolen goods.

The whole idea is, no matter what happens, those goods are
not to be circulating in the hands of the public. You could give
them back to the local rep, and he could have them shredded.
(Some factories shred their e-waste to prevent recovery by
waste removal people.)

Those samples could have defects, maybe they don't have
a 100,000 hour operating life (early mortality). They might not
even compute properly at full speed. Like an ES 3GHz processor,
there might be an errata sheet in the box, stating you're supposed
to run them at 2GHz.

Intel could also mark them with sufficient information, to
trace them back to who received them. To determine who is leaking
them and violating a contract term.

With other manufacturers, those parts are the equivalent of the
"qual barrel". And the stuff in the qual barrel, is definitely
not production quality.

Not allowing them to be sold, is to protect *you* from receiving
inferior goods.

Paul

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:27:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available> wrote:

> Kinsey,
>
>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>
> Simple : you're not allowed to sell what you do not own.

Of course you own it, they don't want them back.

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:46:24 -0000, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

> On 1/3/2022 12:21 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>
> https://www.intel.ca/content/www/ca/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>
> "Can I get engineering sample processors from Intel?
>
> Due to the pre-production nature of the engineering sample processors,
> they are generally only loaned to OEMs, ODMs, and ISVs for pre-production
> test and evaluation work under specific contractual terms and conditions
> to assure the protection of assets and confidential information.
>
> Engineering sample processors are not made available
> to the general public by Intel."
>
> In effect, you're in possession of stolen goods.

They're not stolen, since Intel don't take them back from who they "lent" them to.

> The whole idea is, no matter what happens, those goods are
> not to be circulating in the hands of the public. You could give
> them back to the local rep, and he could have them shredded.
> (Some factories shred their e-waste to prevent recovery by
> waste removal people.)
>
> Those samples could have defects, maybe they don't have
> a 100,000 hour operating life (early mortality). They might not
> even compute properly at full speed. Like an ES 3GHz processor,
> there might be an errata sheet in the box, stating you're supposed
> to run them at 2GHz.
>
> Intel could also mark them with sufficient information, to
> trace them back to who received them. To determine who is leaking
> them and violating a contract term.
>
> With other manufacturers, those parts are the equivalent of the
> "qual barrel". And the stuff in the qual barrel, is definitely
> not production quality.
>
> Not allowing them to be sold, is to protect *you* from receiving
> inferior goods.

They clearly say sample on them. If I bought one knowing it's a sample, why would I have a problem?

NOTE: OP shotgun multi-posted to more than 3 newsgroups. My reply was
submitted to only the relevant newsgroups. Following newsgroups were
omitted in my reply:

uk.legal
sci.electronics.basics

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
^^^^^^^^^^___ You don't own nor have permission to
use this registered & active domain.

> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html

They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
cycle before product launch.

and

- Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
- Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
- Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and
use.
- Are not for sale or resale.
- May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
by Intel

You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It's NOT your car.

So, just how did YOU acquire an engineering sample? You'd already know
the answer if you had filled out all the paperwork. Or, WHO is selling
what they claim is an engineering sample?

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:46:24 -0000, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 1/3/2022 12:21 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>
>> https://www.intel.ca/content/www/ca/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>
>> "Can I get engineering sample processors from Intel?
>>
>> Due to the pre-production nature of the engineering sample processors,
>> they are generally only loaned to OEMs, ODMs, and ISVs for pre-production
>> test and evaluation work under specific contractual terms and conditions
>> to assure the protection of assets and confidential information.
>>
>> Engineering sample processors are not made available
>> to the general public by Intel."
>>
>> In effect, you're in possession of stolen goods.
>
> They're not stolen, since Intel don't take them back from who they "lent" them to.
>
>> The whole idea is, no matter what happens, those goods are
>> not to be circulating in the hands of the public. You could give
>> them back to the local rep, and he could have them shredded.
>> (Some factories shred their e-waste to prevent recovery by
>> waste removal people.)
>>
>> Those samples could have defects, maybe they don't have
>> a 100,000 hour operating life (early mortality). They might not
>> even compute properly at full speed. Like an ES 3GHz processor,
>> there might be an errata sheet in the box, stating you're supposed
>> to run them at 2GHz.
>>
>> Intel could also mark them with sufficient information, to
>> trace them back to who received them. To determine who is leaking
>> them and violating a contract term.
>>
>> With other manufacturers, those parts are the equivalent of the
>> "qual barrel". And the stuff in the qual barrel, is definitely
>> not production quality.
>>
>> Not allowing them to be sold, is to protect *you* from receiving
>> inferior goods.
>
> They clearly say sample on them. If I bought one knowing it's a sample, why would I have a problem?

Someone could rent a car, and then sell it to you. The sale was illegal
by the seller, but YOU are in possesion of stolen property.

WHO sold you the engineering sample?

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:

> NOTE: OP shotgun multi-posted to more than 3 newsgroups. My reply was
> submitted to only the relevant newsgroups. Following newsgroups were
> omitted in my reply:
>
> uk.legal

Readded, why is this not to do with legalities?

> sci.electronics.basics

A CPU is electronic you utter nitwit.

> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
> ^^^^^^^^^^___ You don't own nor have permission to
> use this registered & active domain.

They should have thought of that when they sold absolute shite. I'll put whatever I want in there. If anyone chooses to email it, they're the ones breaking the law.

>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>
> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>
> They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
> manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
> independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
> cycle before product launch.
>and
>
> - Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
> - Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
> - Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
> agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and
> use.
> - Are not for sale or resale.
> - May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
> Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
> by Intel
>
> You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It's NOT your car.

Intel don't ask for it back like the car rental place does. It's given not loaned.

> So, just how did YOU acquire an engineering sample? You'd already know
> the answer if you had filled out all the paperwork. Or, WHO is selling
> what they claim is an engineering sample?

Why would I grass off someone who supplied me with a nice cheap CPU?

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
> ^^^^^^^^^^___ You don't own nor have permission to
> use this registered & active domain.

Actually it isn't. Were you thinking of spam.com? Please pay attention at the back.

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:58:13 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:46:24 -0000, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/3/2022 12:21 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>>
>>> https://www.intel.ca/content/www/ca/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>>
>>> "Can I get engineering sample processors from Intel?
>>>
>>> Due to the pre-production nature of the engineering sample processors,
>>> they are generally only loaned to OEMs, ODMs, and ISVs for pre-production
>>> test and evaluation work under specific contractual terms and conditions
>>> to assure the protection of assets and confidential information.
>>>
>>> Engineering sample processors are not made available
>>> to the general public by Intel."
>>>
>>> In effect, you're in possession of stolen goods.
>>
>> They're not stolen, since Intel don't take them back from who they "lent" them to.
>>
>>> The whole idea is, no matter what happens, those goods are
>>> not to be circulating in the hands of the public. You could give
>>> them back to the local rep, and he could have them shredded.
>>> (Some factories shred their e-waste to prevent recovery by
>>> waste removal people.)
>>>
>>> Those samples could have defects, maybe they don't have
>>> a 100,000 hour operating life (early mortality). They might not
>>> even compute properly at full speed. Like an ES 3GHz processor,
>>> there might be an errata sheet in the box, stating you're supposed
>>> to run them at 2GHz.
>>>
>>> Intel could also mark them with sufficient information, to
>>> trace them back to who received them. To determine who is leaking
>>> them and violating a contract term.
>>>
>>> With other manufacturers, those parts are the equivalent of the
>>> "qual barrel". And the stuff in the qual barrel, is definitely
>>> not production quality.
>>>
>>> Not allowing them to be sold, is to protect *you* from receiving
>>> inferior goods.
>>
>> They clearly say sample on them. If I bought one knowing it's a sample, why would I have a problem?
>
> Someone could rent a car, and then sell it to you. The sale was illegal
> by the seller, but YOU are in possesion of stolen property.
>
> WHO sold you the engineering sample?

You've stated those two things in another post, stop repeating yourself.

Kinsey,

> Of course you own it, they don't want them back.

Don't be stupid. They might not want them back, but you can take it for
granted that those "gifts" come with a set of rules and stipulations.
Accept the "gift" and you're bound to those. And you can bet your ass on it
that one of those rules says that it cannot be sold to anyone else, or even
given away.

And when you break that agreement they are fully in their right to demand
their "gift" back.

So no, you do not own them in the sense that you can do with them whatever
you like. Which, by your own initial question, you already knew.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On 03/01/2022 20:41, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>
>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>                       ^^^^^^^^^^___ You don't own nor have permission to
>>                                     use this registered & active domain.
>
> Actually it isn't.  Were you thinking of spam.com?  Please pay attention
> at the back.

The only idiot here is the one who thinks that nospam.com isn't
registered. It is and you don't own the domain.

Do you know how to check?

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 21:11:24 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available> wrote:

> Kinsey,
>
>> Of course you own it, they don't want them back.
>
> Don't be stupid. They might not want them back, but you can take it for
> granted that those "gifts" come with a set of rules and stipulations.
> Accept the "gift" and you're bound to those. And you can bet your ass on it
> that one of those rules says that it cannot be sold to anyone else, or even
> given away.

It's given to you for testing. Once you've done the testing and written your review, you're not harming Intel by selling it.

> And when you break that agreement they are fully in their right to demand
> their "gift" back.
>
> So no, you do not own them in the sense that you can do with them whatever
> you like. Which, by your own initial question, you already knew.

Readily available on Ebay.

On 03/01/2022 20:40, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>
>> NOTE: OP shotgun multi-posted to more than 3 newsgroups.  My reply was
>> submitted to only the relevant newsgroups.  Following newsgroups were
>> omitted in my reply:
>>
>> uk.legal
>
> Readded, why is this not to do with legalities?
>
>> sci.electronics.basics
>
> A CPU is electronic you utter nitwit.

The only nitwit here is one who thinks that no one who posts in the
suggested group has a grasp of the legal aspects of samples.

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 21:15:15 -0000, Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> On 03/01/2022 20:41, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>
>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^___ You don't own nor have permission to
>>> use this registered & active domain.
>>
>> Actually it isn't. Were you thinking of spam.com? Please pay attention
>> at the back.
>
> The only idiot here is the one who thinks that nospam.com isn't
> registered. It is and you don't own the domain.
>
> Do you know how to check?

Try going to it. It's for sale, just like iurvesiugbstgb.com. You can buy either if you want.

And I'm not "using" the domain by stating it here. Anyone who spams it however, is.

Let me make this simple for your simple mind:
I spot a car that's left unlocked. I point it out to you. You steal the car. Who's the theif?

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 21:17:29 -0000, Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> On 03/01/2022 20:40, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>
>>> NOTE: OP shotgun multi-posted to more than 3 newsgroups. My reply was
>>> submitted to only the relevant newsgroups. Following newsgroups were
>>> omitted in my reply:
>>>
>>> uk.legal
>>
>> Readded, why is this not to do with legalities?
>>
>>> sci.electronics.basics
>>
>> A CPU is electronic you utter nitwit.
>
> The only nitwit here is one who thinks that no one who posts in the
> suggested group has a grasp of the legal aspects of samples.

You've got your negatives mixed up there. I think that some of them do, which is why I posted to that group.

On 03/01/2022 21:23, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 21:15:15 -0000, Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 03/01/2022 20:41, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>                       ^^^^^^^^^^___ You don't own nor have
>>>> permission to
>>>>                                     use this registered & active
>>>> domain.
>>>
>>> Actually it isn't.  Were you thinking of spam.com?  Please pay attention
>>> at the back.
>>
>> The only idiot here is the one who thinks that nospam.com isn't
>> registered. It is and you don't own the domain.
>>
>> Do you know how to check?
>
> Try going to it.  It's for sale, just like iurvesiugbstgb.com.  You can
> buy either if you want.
>
> And I'm not "using" the domain by stating it here.  Anyone who spams it
> however, is.
>
> Let me make this simple for your simple mind:
> I spot a car that's left unlocked.  I point it out to you.  You steal
> the car.  Who's the theif?

You are complicit where you are aiding and abetting the theft through
Joint Enterprise.

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 21:27:56 -0000, Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> On 03/01/2022 21:23, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 21:15:15 -0000, Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/01/2022 20:41, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>> ^^^^^^^^^^___ You don't own nor have
>>>>> permission to
>>>>> use this registered & active
>>>>> domain.
>>>>
>>>> Actually it isn't. Were you thinking of spam.com? Please pay attention
>>>> at the back.
>>>
>>> The only idiot here is the one who thinks that nospam.com isn't
>>> registered. It is and you don't own the domain.
>>>
>>> Do you know how to check?
>>
>> Try going to it. It's for sale, just like iurvesiugbstgb.com. You can
>> buy either if you want.
>>
>> And I'm not "using" the domain by stating it here. Anyone who spams it
>> however, is.
>>
>> Let me make this simple for your simple mind:
>> I spot a car that's left unlocked. I point it out to you. You steal
>> the car. Who's the theif?
>
> You are complicit where you are aiding and abetting the theft through
> Joint Enterprise.

Stop being such a pedantic fuckwit. There is no judge on this earth who would do me for saying to you, "hey that car's not locked".

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 22:01:31 -0000, Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

> Paul wrote:
> =========
>>
>> > Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>
>> Due to the pre-production nature of the engineering sample processors,
>> they are generally only loaned to OEMs, ODMs, and ISVs for pre-production
>> test and evaluation work under specific contractual terms and conditions
>> to assure the protection of assets and confidential information.
>>
>> Engineering sample processors are not made available
>> to the general public by Intel."
>>
>> In effect, you're in possession of stolen goods.
>>
>> The whole idea is, no matter what happens, those goods are
>> not to be circulating in the hands of the public. You could give
>> them back to the local rep, and he could have them shredded.
>> (Some factories shred their e-waste to prevent recovery by
>> waste removal people.)
>>
>> Those samples could have defects, maybe they don't have
>> a 100,000 hour operating life (early mortality). They might not
>> even compute properly at full speed. Like an ES 3GHz processor,
>> there might be an errata sheet in the box, stating you're supposed
>> to run them at 2GHz.
>>
>> Intel could also mark them with sufficient information, to
>> trace them back to who received them. To determine who is leaking
>> them and violating a contract term.
>>
>> With other manufacturers, those parts are the equivalent of the
>> "qual barrel". And the stuff in the qual barrel, is definitely
>> not production quality.
>>
>> Not allowing them to be sold, is to protect *you* from receiving
>> inferior goods.
>
> ** True story:
>
> A manufacturer here in Sydney ( Jands Electronics) made a "pre-production" batch of a new model power amplifier for professional use.
> They wisely chose to road test it in the expected environment - on the road with live bands.
> They proved to be problematic in several respects and the design was heavily revised for the production version.
> The sample amps were fully labelled with the maker's logo and the same model number as the later versions.

Well that was pretty stupid of them. At least Intel stamp their CPUs with "engineering sample".

> Think there were about 20 of them, put into storage for eventual disposal.
>
> Then an enterprising staff member obtained them and decided he could sell them all to a local second hand dealer - letting him believe they were just like the regular models on sale at the time - but for a very low price so giving him a large mark up.

So he lied. But my question was about selling them as engineering samples.

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:58:13 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>
>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:46:24 -0000, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/3/2022 12:21 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.intel.ca/content/www/ca/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>>>
>>>> "Can I get engineering sample processors from Intel?
>>>>
>>>> Due to the pre-production nature of the engineering sample processors,
>>>> they are generally only loaned to OEMs, ODMs, and ISVs for pre-production
>>>> test and evaluation work under specific contractual terms and conditions
>>>> to assure the protection of assets and confidential information.
>>>>
>>>> Engineering sample processors are not made available
>>>> to the general public by Intel."
>>>>
>>>> In effect, you're in possession of stolen goods.
>>>
>>> They're not stolen, since Intel don't take them back from who they "lent" them to.
>>>
>>>> The whole idea is, no matter what happens, those goods are
>>>> not to be circulating in the hands of the public. You could give
>>>> them back to the local rep, and he could have them shredded.
>>>> (Some factories shred their e-waste to prevent recovery by
>>>> waste removal people.)
>>>>
>>>> Those samples could have defects, maybe they don't have
>>>> a 100,000 hour operating life (early mortality). They might not
>>>> even compute properly at full speed. Like an ES 3GHz processor,
>>>> there might be an errata sheet in the box, stating you're supposed
>>>> to run them at 2GHz.
>>>>
>>>> Intel could also mark them with sufficient information, to
>>>> trace them back to who received them. To determine who is leaking
>>>> them and violating a contract term.
>>>>
>>>> With other manufacturers, those parts are the equivalent of the
>>>> "qual barrel". And the stuff in the qual barrel, is definitely
>>>> not production quality.
>>>>
>>>> Not allowing them to be sold, is to protect *you* from receiving
>>>> inferior goods.
>>>
>>> They clearly say sample on them. If I bought one knowing it's a sample, why would I have a problem?
>>
>> Someone could rent a car, and then sell it to you. The sale was illegal
>> by the seller, but YOU are in possesion of stolen property.
>>
>> WHO sold you the engineering sample?
>
> You've stated those two things in another post, stop repeating yourself.

Still applicable. That was the best retort you could come up with? And
you STILL haven't answered who sold you or is selling those samples.
Hmm, maybe you're the seller. Reminds of the scammers on eBay that
slice up a volume license to separate individual buyers.

NOTE: Continued excessive cross-posting thwarted. Number of
cross-posted newsgroups reduced from 4 to 2.

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>
>> NOTE: OP shotgun multi-posted to more than 3 newsgroups. My reply was
>> submitted to only the relevant newsgroups. Following newsgroups were
>> omitted in my reply:
>>
>> uk.legal
>
> Readded, why is this not to do with legalities?
>
>> sci.electronics.basics
>
> A CPU is electronic you utter nitwit.

Cross-posting to more than 3 newsgroups violates netiquette. Doesn't
how many you contrive are on-topic. Some netizens consider more than 2
to be excessive.

>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>> ^^^^^^^^^^___ You don't own nor have permission to
>> use this registered & active domain.
>
> They should have thought of that when they sold absolute shite.

How is that relevant to the domain you used in your address field?

> I'll put whatever I want in there.

Yep, the excuse of a troll.

> If anyone chooses to email it, they're the ones breaking the law.

Oh, that law. Uh huh.

Hmm, a nitwit that has no knowlege of the .invalid TLD. Else, YOU are
the spammer energizing spam and other unsolicited messages to a domain
that isn't yours. Yep, trolls aren't known for being polite.

>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>
>> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>
>> They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
>> manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
>> independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
>> cycle before product launch.
>>and
>>
>> - Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
>> - Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
>> - Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
>> agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and
>> use.
>> - Are not for sale or resale.
>> - May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
>> Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
>> by Intel
>>
>> You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It's NOT your car.
>
> Intel don't ask for it back like the car rental place does. It's
> given not loaned.

Wrong. Loans don't always require [re]payment. That's just what you
are used to. Because of her financial situation, I know someone that
got a loan with zero interest, zero payments, and no lien on change of
title of the home, so no payback. Granting use does not mandate payment
nor return.

Oh, did YOU happen to get all the paperwork allowing you to possess the
engineering sample to definitely know the samples were not to be
returned? My guess, and yours, is return was not required, especially
since the samples could be damaged on use. You think someone who loans
you a stick of gum really wants it back?

>> So, just how did YOU acquire an engineering sample? You'd already
>> know the answer if you had filled out all the paperwork. Or, WHO is
>> selling what they claim is an engineering sample?
>
> Why would I grass off someone who supplied me with a nice cheap CPU?

So, why are you whining about others stating you are in possession of
stolen goods, because obviously you don't care about aiding thieves. To
you, if you don't get caught, it ain't illegal.

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 23:34:55 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:58:13 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>
>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:46:24 -0000, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/3/2022 12:21 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.intel.ca/content/www/ca/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>>>>
>>>>> "Can I get engineering sample processors from Intel?
>>>>>
>>>>> Due to the pre-production nature of the engineering sample processors,
>>>>> they are generally only loaned to OEMs, ODMs, and ISVs for pre-production
>>>>> test and evaluation work under specific contractual terms and conditions
>>>>> to assure the protection of assets and confidential information.
>>>>>
>>>>> Engineering sample processors are not made available
>>>>> to the general public by Intel."
>>>>>
>>>>> In effect, you're in possession of stolen goods.
>>>>
>>>> They're not stolen, since Intel don't take them back from who they "lent" them to.
>>>>
>>>>> The whole idea is, no matter what happens, those goods are
>>>>> not to be circulating in the hands of the public. You could give
>>>>> them back to the local rep, and he could have them shredded.
>>>>> (Some factories shred their e-waste to prevent recovery by
>>>>> waste removal people.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Those samples could have defects, maybe they don't have
>>>>> a 100,000 hour operating life (early mortality). They might not
>>>>> even compute properly at full speed. Like an ES 3GHz processor,
>>>>> there might be an errata sheet in the box, stating you're supposed
>>>>> to run them at 2GHz.
>>>>>
>>>>> Intel could also mark them with sufficient information, to
>>>>> trace them back to who received them. To determine who is leaking
>>>>> them and violating a contract term.
>>>>>
>>>>> With other manufacturers, those parts are the equivalent of the
>>>>> "qual barrel". And the stuff in the qual barrel, is definitely
>>>>> not production quality.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not allowing them to be sold, is to protect *you* from receiving
>>>>> inferior goods.
>>>>
>>>> They clearly say sample on them. If I bought one knowing it's a sample, why would I have a problem?
>>>
>>> Someone could rent a car, and then sell it to you. The sale was illegal
>>> by the seller, but YOU are in possesion of stolen property.
>>>
>>> WHO sold you the engineering sample?
>>
>> You've stated those two things in another post, stop repeating yourself.
>
> Still applicable.

No point as I'll see it in the other post.

> That was the best retort you could come up with?

It wasn't a retort, I was pointing out you're wasting time saying the same thing multiple times.

> And you STILL haven't answered who sold you or is selling those samples.
> Hmm, maybe you're the seller. Reminds of the scammers on eBay that
> slice up a volume license to separate individual buyers.

Why would I want you to grass him off?

As for licenses, I've bought about 50 Windows 7 premium licenses, with genuine stickers for £37 when the retail was £137. They work fine.

NOTE: Excessive cross-posted by, um, "Commander" thwarted. Newsgroup
count reduced from 4 to 2.

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>
>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>> ^^^^^^^^^^___ You don't own nor have permission to
>> use this registered & active domain.
>
> Actually it isn't. Were you thinking of spam.com? Please pay
> attention at the back.

nospam.com is both a registered and active domain (webhosted at
linode.com). It isn't yours. There is nothing at the squatter's site
granting your use of their domain.

So, tell us which domain you paid for its registration, and is active
with a web or mail server, so we can start energizing crap to bombard
your domain. See how you like the abuse.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5322#section-3.6.2
from = "From:" mailbox-list CRLF
In all cases, the "From:" field SHOULD NOT contain any mailbox that does
not belong to the author(s) of the message.

On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 23:49:48 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:

> NOTE: Continued excessive cross-posting thwarted. Number of
> cross-posted newsgroups reduced from 4 to 2.
>
> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>
>>> NOTE: OP shotgun multi-posted to more than 3 newsgroups. My reply was
>>> submitted to only the relevant newsgroups. Following newsgroups were
>>> omitted in my reply:
>>>
>>> uk.legal
>>
>> Readded, why is this not to do with legalities?
>>
>>> sci.electronics.basics
>>
>> A CPU is electronic you utter nitwit.
>
> Cross-posting to more than 3 newsgroups violates netiquette.

If it shouldn't be done, it's odd how every newsreader allows it.

I post to groups where I think people will give an answer or be interested.

> Doesn't how many you contrive are on-topic. Some netizens consider more than 2
> to be excessive.

Using the word netizen indicates you're a freak.

>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^___ You don't own nor have permission to
>>> use this registered & active domain.
>>
>> They should have thought of that when they sold absolute shite.
>
> How is that relevant to the domain you used in your address field?

I thought you were talking about spam.com, Hormel Food Corporation, that sells that disgusting waste product as food. I didn't realise you'd be stupid enough to think nospam.com was a company.

>> I'll put whatever I want in there.
>
> Yep, the excuse of a troll.

I'm not going to put my own address in there and receive spam am I?

>> If anyone chooses to email it, they're the ones breaking the law.
>
> Oh, that law. Uh huh.

Spam is illegal is it not? If not why not?

> Hmm, a nitwit that has no knowlege of the .invalid TLD.

I do, but see no point in using it.

> Else, YOU are
> the spammer energizing spam and other unsolicited messages to a domain
> that isn't yours. Yep, trolls aren't known for being polite.

It isn't anyone's, and I'm not the one sending the spam.

>>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>>
>>> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>>
>>> They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
>>> manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
>>> independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
>>> cycle before product launch.
>>> and
>>>
>>> - Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
>>> - Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
>>> - Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
>>> agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and
>>> use.
>>> - Are not for sale or resale.
>>> - May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
>>> Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
>>> by Intel
>>>
>>> You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It's NOT your car.
>>
>> Intel don't ask for it back like the car rental place does. It's
>> given not loaned.
>
> Wrong. Loans don't always require [re]payment. That's just what you
> are used to. Because of her financial situation, I know someone that
> got a loan with zero interest, zero payments, and no lien on change of
> title of the home, so no payback. Granting use does not mandate payment
> nor return.

That's not a loan if it doesn't have to be paid back, that was a gift.

> Oh, did YOU happen to get all the paperwork allowing you to possess the
> engineering sample to definitely know the samples were not to be
> returned?

Doesn't matter to me. I've paid the money and I have the product, any theft that took place previously is not of my concern.

> My guess, and yours, is return was not required, especially
> since the samples could be damaged on use. You think someone who loans
> you a stick of gum really wants it back?

People do not loan sticks of gum. They give them.

>>> So, just how did YOU acquire an engineering sample? You'd already
>>> know the answer if you had filled out all the paperwork. Or, WHO is
>>> selling what they claim is an engineering sample?
>>
>> Why would I grass off someone who supplied me with a nice cheap CPU?
>
> So, why are you whining about others stating you are in possession of
> stolen goods,

I'm not, I'm whining about it being difficult for sellers to advertise them.

> because obviously you don't care about aiding thieves.

They stole it, not me.

> To you, if you don't get caught, it ain't illegal.

Of course it isn't. When I break the speed limit and don't get caught, I receive no fine, so the law has had no effect on me.

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 21:27:56 -0000, Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 03/01/2022 21:23, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>
>>> Let me make this simple for your simple mind:
>>> I spot a car that's left unlocked. I point it out to you. You
>>> steal the car. Who's the theif?
>>
>> You are complicit where you are aiding and abetting the theft through
>> Joint Enterprise.
>
> Stop being such a pedantic fuckwit. There is no judge on this earth
> who would do me for saying to you, "hey that car's not locked".

I think we're now aware of the age (physical or mental) of "Commander".