From: Bruce Markowitz (scosgt_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: Fri May 03 2002 - 19:52:08 EDT
Of course, they would say that you click the "I agree" button to activate
the software.
The problem is, you could just say:
"I said no, the software activated anyway, so I am not subject to your
license"
Now how on earth could they prove to a jury of your peers (who also hate
Micro$oft and their EULA) that in fact it did not happen this way?
Just because it is supposed to work that way, hell my car is supposed to
start EVERY time I turn the key, that does not ALWAYS work either!
To say NOTHING of Windoze working the way it is supposed to.......
In fact, think about that one, maybe we can all sue MS for selling (oops,
licensing) a defective product that gets BSOD'S
The only thing they can enforce is....
Corporate users not buying a site license (generally some disaffected
ex-employee blows the whistle, and they can sue to recover damages in that
case)...
AND of course, people selling BOOTLEG copies of their software (HAVE
PERSONALLY seen people arrested by the Secret Service for that). But, that's
ANOTHER story
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Poltorak" <jp_at_eyup.org>
To: "thinkpad" <thinkpad_at_cs.utk.edu>
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: Microsoft to get cranky?
> On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 06:45:50PM -0400, STeve Andre' wrote:
> > I'd like to think that, but why then is it the EULA, End User
> > License Agreement?
> >
> > Just because they haven't in the past doesn't mean they
> > might not in the future.
> >
> > You may not have direct dealings with MS, but it's still
> > MS's software, isn't it.
>
> No it's mine. I bought it. I don't accept that the EULA is valid so I
> have no obligations under it. Microsoft does not (yet) pass laws, so the
> EULA has no legal status. If I buy a book, or CD, it's mine. I can use
> it throw it away, give it away, sell it. It's up to me not the
writer/artist.
>
> > Thus even though you didn't
> > enter into the contract directly, you are still obgliated
> > to its terms, because you are using it.
>
> That presupposes that the EULA has any legal authority. I'm using it
> because I paid for it. What do you think buying some goods entitles you
> to? Use them, of course. You don't enter into some dumb agreement not to
> criticise MacDonald if you buy a burger from them, even if they may have
> some sign somewhere saying that by eating such a burger you are committed
> to never saying bad things about them.
>
>
> > I know there is
> > case precedent for that; I've talked with computer
> > aware lawyers who have explained this to me.
> >
> > Sadly, MS can--and perhaps will-try to enforce all sorts
> > of things to stay on top. Look at the XP license, and how
> > it's changed. Look at Office XP and how it says, somwhere,
> > that you will only run it on Windows.
>
> They can say what they want, it doesn't make it legal.
>
> Consumers do have statutory rights, and they would take precedence of
> anything Microsoft thinks you are obligated to do.
>
>
> > MS is scared to death of the GPL world, and at the same
> > time trying to control people stealing from it (like Asia, for
> > example).
> >
> > At this point I wouldn't bet that they wouldn't try some high
> > visibility prosecutions of EULA breechs, for the "educational"
> > impact on others.
> >
> > I think you need to talk with a lawyer on this. You are bound
> > by the licensing agreement as far as I know.
>
> I have not made any legal agreement with Microsoft. What rights can they
> possibly have over me. Clicking on a button cannot be considered to be the
> basis of a legal contract, because a legal contract needs to have at least
> the names of two parties to the contract, and presumably a signature, but
> in any case I haven't bought anything from them so they are not party to
> any deal. They have no rights in the matter.
>
> I defy anyone to show me that there is anything remotely resembling a
> legal contract is in place between the end user and Microsoft when you use
> Windows.
>
> --
> John
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:58:49 EST