[Gllug] New Microsoft Licencing scheme

[Nix]

On 18 Sep 2001, Timothy Coggins said:
> On Tue, 2001-09-18 at 13:42, Bruce Richardson wrote:
>> > If someone agrees to it then of course it is legal.
>> 
>> A contract is not legal just because you agree to it.  That is a basic 
>> principle of contract law.  You can challenge an unjust contract even if 
>> you signed it.
> 
> Indeed, however in this case the user agrees that Microsoft can
> "extinguish" the license as it pleases which looks to me to be perfectly
> legal (IANAL). If the user doesn't agree to it then they do not use the
> product (which is one of the reasons I use Microsoft products as little
> as possible).

If the license has no force, then extinguishing it is meaningless.

(And MS's EULA `licenses' are shrinkwrap, and there's no class of
agreement that maps to them; they're not a copyright license because
they endeavour to restrict what you can *do*, not how you copy; they're
not a contract because both you and MS haven't agreed to it in a manner
such that both parties know the other party has agreed, because MS
doesn't even know who you are, let alone that you've agreed...)

-- 
`Upsetting this BOFH was a BAD MOVE.' --- Chris Newport

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug