Pay yourself a lawyer, Peter, instead of trolling this list. It's not a judge's opinion on the law, but it is better than your mixture of ill supported arguments. Le 12 sept. 2012 à 14:59, Peter Alcibiades a écrit :
> The question isn't whether EULAs are contractually enforceable. As a class, > the answer is that they are. That means that consenting to them can lead to > a valid entry into a contract. CAN. That is not an issue. > > The question is whether some particular terms in a contract, whether entered > into by EULA or other means, are enforceable and lawful in the jurisdiction > one lives in. > > It is my belief, and i'd be very interested to hear of cases on this either > way, that in the EU under the terms under which OSX and Windows are sold, > they are sold and not licensed. Regardless of what is in the EULA, and > regardless of whether the delivery is accompanied by a signed assent to the > EULA or a click through. > > I also believe that post sale restrictions on use are unenforceable in the > EU. Regardless of whether they occur in a EULA or in a condition of sale > document which one signs. I don't believe anyone can sell you a CD recorder > and stipulate in the conditions of sale that you only use their own brand > blanks. For instance. I don't believe Wolfcraft can stipulate as a > condition of sale that you shall not use someone else's hoe attachment. Or > the hose and tap people can stipulate as a condition of sale that you shall > not connect someone else's tap or coupler to theirs. > > Just because a given form of entry into a contract may be OK, it does not > follow that all contracts entered into in this way are valid and binding. > its not really about EULAs. Its about the law in your country and the > clause. > > In the EU, for instance, one can swear a contract in which he gives up his > consumer protection rights in exchange for an extended warranty or some > other reason. The act is not valid, because it is contrary to consumer > protection law, and you do not have the power to do that. It will not be > enforceable. > > What is needed is an EU case in which either running the thing in a VM or on > the wrong sort of hardware was ruled breach of contract and some kind of > ruling made. I don't know of one. Maybe someone else does. Lets hear it. > > _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode