So, given that Windows itself (i.e. no need for IIS!) has a multiplexing clause, and it keeps the files uploaded through a storage node, how would you interpret the following statement from the PDFs?
For example, any user or device that accesses the server, files, data or content provided by the server that is made available through an automated process requires a Client Access License (CAL).
Got the verdict.
TLDR: You need Windows Server license if you want to run software that serves multiple customers.
Here is the most important takeaway (added emphasis):
Q: Is it legal for me to run a Windows 10/11 Home system with an Apache web server that serves thousands of my customers over the Internet? I am not using Microsoft IIS.
A: The restrictions you’ve read from the Windows 10/11 Home edition Terms of Use generally apply to the use of the operating system itself as server software, not specifically to third-party applications like Apache. However, the key point in the terms is the prohibition of using the software for commercial hosting or allowing multiple users to access it simultaneously over a network in a way that it functions as server software.
While the terms do not explicitly mention third-party software, the intent is to restrict the use of the Home edition for server purposes, which includes hosting a web server that serves thousands of customers. This is typically a scenario for which a server edition of Windows would be appropriate, due to both technical and licensing considerations
It’s important to note that while you can technically install and run Apache on Windows 10/11 Home, doing so to serve a large number of customers over the internet may be considered using the OS as server software, which could potentially violate the licensing terms.
For commercial purposes and to ensure compliance with Microsoft’s licensing terms, it’s recommended to use a version of Windows that is designed for such use, like Windows Server editions.
I don’t know about you, but this is sufficient evidence for me against running storage node on Windows Home or Workstation Editions. From the horses mouth.
Bot WC said:
An agent will be with you in a moment.
Bot WC said:
NHAEL
NHAEL said:
Thank you for contacting Microsoft Support! My name is Nhael. To ensure the best support experience, please stay active in this chat window and avoid switching tabs. May I have your name please?
NHAEL - 3:44 PM
You said:
Number 619-630-XXXX.
I have a licensing question about Windows 10/11 Home edition Terms of use. In short my question is: Is it legal for me to run a Windows 10/11 Home system with an Apache web server that serves thousands of my customers over the Internet? I am not using Microsoft IIS.
My concern comes from reading the terms here New Page, that state:
c. Restrictions.
…
(v) use the software as server software, for commercial hosting, make the software available for simultaneous use by multiple users over a network, install the software on a server and allow users to access it remotely, or install the software on a device for use only by remote users
Does it also apply to third party software I might install, such as Apache web server, or only Windows IIS?
NHAEL said:
The restrictions you’ve read from the Windows 10/11 Home edition Terms of Use generally apply to the use of the operating system itself as server software, not specifically to third-party applications like Apache. However, the key point in the terms is the prohibition of using the software for commercial hosting or allowing multiple users to access it simultaneously over a network in a way that it functions as server software.
NHAEL said:
While the terms do not explicitly mention third-party software, the intent is to restrict the use of the Home edition for server purposes, which includes hosting a web server that serves thousands of customers. This is typically a scenario for which a server edition of Windows would be appropriate, due to both technical and licensing considerations
NHAEL said:
It’s important to note that while you can technically install and run Apache on Windows 10/11 Home, doing so to serve a large number of customers over the internet may be considered using the OS as server software, which could potentially violate the licensing terms.
NHAEL said:
For commercial purposes and to ensure compliance with Microsoft’s licensing terms, it’s recommended to use a version of Windows that is designed for such use, like Windows Server editions.
NHAEL - 3:50 PM
You said:
Thank you, this is precisely what I wanted to hear explicitly!.
So to confirm, for my usecase of using Apache Web Server to serve thousands of customers, in order to comply with the ToS, I need to buy Windows Server license, even though I don’t use any windows features to serve customers. Right?
3:51 PM - Sent
NHAEL said:
You’re correct.
NHAEL said:
I hope I was able to resolve your concern today. Would there be anything else I can help you with?
NHAEL - 3:52 PM
You said:
Yes. One last question, would you object if I quote our conversation on a third party public forum related to another server software, in the conversation about windows licensing terms?
3:53 PM - Sent
NHAEL said:
We won’t mind. You can definitely quote our conversation today to a public forum.
NHAEL - 3:54 PM
You said:
Thank you Nhael, I appreciate your prompt and concise help today! Have a great rest of your day
NHAEL said:
You’re welcome! I appreciate you collaborating with me. Working with you is awesome!
NHAEL said:
Your feedback is important to us. Please stay in this chat window so you can tell us about your experience.
NHAEL - 3:55 PM
You said:
Will do
3:55 PM - Sent
NHAEL said:
Again, this is Nhael, we thank you for contacting Microsoft support. You can always contact us in the future using this link: Póngase en contacto con nosotros: soporte técnico de Microsoft Have a great day, keep safe and stay healthy always!
NHAEL - 3:55 PM
Is that from the multiplexing doc: where right above it… it says this?
"This brief explains how multiplexing impacts the licensing of Microsoft server operating systems and server products licensed under the Microsoft server/Client Access License (CAL) model. "
People have been linking to MS term, specifically talking about MS apps. That doesn’t appy to 3rd-party apps.
Unless Storj is covered by MS’s OS of CAL licensing?
Is it only me, or does their answer sound like written by an LLM? 
No, but the Windows APIs that a storage node uses to write the files, and then read them back, are.
I think the more people interact with LLMs the more they start sounding like ones… it’s self-reinforcing circle.
I appreciate the work you’ve done for this! Your rep said:
“…it’s recommended to use a version of Windows that is designed for such use, like Windows Server editions…”
…and…
“… doing so to serve a large number of customers over the internet may be considered using the OS as server software, which could potentially violate the licensing terms…”
So, Server is recommended. Fair enough. And apps may be considered ‘server software’ that could potentially violate license terms? That’s vague. It certainly doesn’t support the assertion that Apache needs Server to comply with licensing. It sounds like a risk-mitigation sales response.
You’re making me go Google more of this myself: as I’d like to provide you good links too! Because this is a solved question: we addressed it at my last workplace (as we had non-prod systems serving non-IIS websites). And our answer from our MS reps was that it was fine.
But I know that me saying that doesn’t prove anything. Maybe Storj will weigh-in. And I’ll look for a definitive response: because the final assertion of NHAEL is incorrect. If it were: any Internet-connected 3rd-party app you install would need Server: as simply communicating is providing a service to external users.
Exactly! The OS license grants you permission to call the Windows APIs. From any app. If you’re licensed for Windows: you’re licensed for Storj to call those APIs. No CALs, no limits.
Maybe. It did makes sense to me though, especially this “the key point in the terms is the prohibition of using the software for commercial hosting or allowing multiple users to access it simultaneously over a network in a way that it functions as server software” makes it abundantly clear what the intent is.
The difference is who initiates the request. With any other Internet connected apps – browsers, ftp clients , storj clients, chat software, games, etc, it’s the user who initiates the interactions. The customer is that one user sitting in front of that one OS instance.
Storagenode and apache, on the other hand, is the precisely that server software – where it sits unattended in the closet, lets other people connect to it using DRPC and HTTP, serves other customers, not you, but earns you money – this is precisely what the agreement is trying to prevent.
The soft language – May, recommended, could, etc, it’s pretty standard practice to avoid speaking in absolute terms, and its’ especially widespread in US. “It could be helpful if you considered washing dishes sooner than later” means “Go wash dishes NOW!!!”
Exactly! The OS license grants you permission to call the Windows API. But not Joe-the-Storj-customer, he would need a separate CAL to access Windows API on your machine.
poor @Alexey will have to move this mostly to:
Thanks!
But I would leave it here for a while. Thanks for the link!
