This is about activation using piracy, and distribution of pirated activation keys, which do not constitute a licence. More importantly, it is the distributor who has been sued for piracy and copyright violations, not the end user.
There is nothing about using the free version of Windows downloaded from Microsoft without activation.
There are two aspects about the limited nature of the ambiguous EULA:
1. Microsoft is happy to allow users to continue using their free version without activation, as long as there is no tampering. Because it should be extremely simple for Microsoft to block the untampered software, if required. Why is Microsoft not doing that if there was an unacceptable violation?
2. The cost of litigation will far exceed eventual realisation of compensation for damages, if at all.
I say that as long as MS lets it happen, why not. I paid way more tan $15.00 for a copy of Windows 11 because I wanted to make sure I was being honest with using my first mini-PC that came with a MAK key and I still wound up with a MAK key. I'm wondering if MS is letting MAK keys to be sold so they can get as many devices as they can running Windows 11.
For crying out loud, the real issue is not whether MS come after you!
OP is talking about licensing company pcs. Companies can be subjected to audits - my company always insists on the right to audit its potential suppliers.
One of the key questions sometimes asked is for a company to provide evidence of legitimate licence purchase before they are accepted as a supplier of services.
My company will not do business with companies that cannot provide such evidence - they will not be seen to be dealing with companies that potentially use pirated software.
So if OP bypasses EULA, they run risk of losing work or even being blacklisted.
This is the real issue!
Frankly, the company would be stupid for the sake of a couple of hundred pounds or so to not comply with the EULAs.
For avoidance of doubt, there is absolutely no suggestion that OP would even consider this but misleading him e.g. saying MS do not care could put his company at risk unintentionally.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a similar vein, I had a copy of MS Office on my PC licenced to me by company A which I could use for work by Company B but I decided that was unacceptable as the copy was licenced to me SOLELY for work to Company A. Had I been audited by Company B, I would run risk of Company B refusing to allow me to do work for them, and of course if Company A found out, I would have licence revoked, and never be able to work for them again.
So I purchased a legitimate Office 365 licence, and even informed Company A I no longer required a licence from them, providing evidence of my official licence.
