On 09/12/2012 04:45 PM, Kay C Lan wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Richard Gaskin
<ambassa...@fourthworld.com>wrote:
That's one question, and it may be interesting to see how it plays out if
Apple ever enforces the "Apple branded hardware" clause in their EULA.
Why is it assumed that Apple must be the one to go to court to enforce
it's rule.
If the EULA is so horribly unethical then why isn't there are groundswell
of anti-EULA sentiment.
Because the vast majority of folk really don't exercise their minds on
this sort of ethical/legal
question at all; they just install the software, click the "accept"
button, and get on with whatever
they have to get on with.
It certainly worked for the Focebook ToCs that
caused a public outcry last year, and they were subsequently changed. Apple
had a similar episode with it's iBooks EULA and it was subsequently changed.
Millions of people, including many all over Europe are more than happy to
abide by the EULA as it stands now.
No, they are not "happy to abide"; they don't even know that they are
abiding by anything at all.
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
