Here are some of my ideas for Fedora 8 and Fedora 9

David Boles dgboles at gmail.com
Sun Jul 8 00:50:21 UTC 2007


on 7/7/2007 4:58 PM, Erik Hemdal wrote:
>> Message: 10
>> Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:52:14 -0500
>> From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com>
> . . . .
>> David Boles wrote:
>>
>> You have an extremely one-sided view.  There is no reason to assume that 
>> everything a EULA demands is legal. You may end up in an expensive 
>> lawsuit if you break it, but it's a mix bag who will win.  For example, 
>> if someone sells you a product and demands that you can't resell it, 
>> that demand is not legal:
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/11/28/us_court_ruling_nixes_software/
>> If they say you can't reverse engineer it, that's still up in the air:
>> http://cse.stanford.edu/class/cs201/projects-99-00/intellectual-property-law/reverse_engineering.htm
>> although the DCMA would apply to some software and change things in 
>> countries that support it.
>>
> 
> Thanks Les.  I could not recall DMCA, but that's the ugly law I meant.
> The problem with EULA's is that you have to fight them out in court.  If
> a publisher make them nasty enough, many people will just give in and
> accept the terms, as David suggested.
> 
> I can recommend http://www.badsoftware.com as a very informative site
> about consumer protections regarding packaged software.  The author
> behind the site (and an author of the associated book) is an attorney
> and a software test practitioner, as well as an awfully nice guy.

You did read the disclaimer in *bold* at the very bottom of the page you
linked?

;-)

-- 

  David


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20070707/d00ce4cd/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the fedora-list mailing list