The Most Oppressive Clause in Microsoft's EULA...
anonymous_at_discussions.microsoft.com
Date: 10/14/04
- Next message: eagle: "RE: "Security Alert" window"
- Previous message: Ramesh [MVP]: "Re: HTML Files Edit Problem"
- In reply to: democratix: "The Most Oppressive Clause in Microsoft's EULA..."
- Next in thread: Sigfried: "Re: The Most Oppressive Clause in Microsoft's EULA..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 21:11:38 -0700
ever notice that copyrights have not expired for things
,ever since micky mouse was invented and copywrited.
big bussiness has big money for bribes and such.the truth
hurts, doesn't it?
imagine all the anti-spyware company people who would be
going to jail if the spyware scum went after them for
reverse engineering.
>-----Original Message-----
>....and typical of proprietary software in general:
>
>*******
>* Limitations on Reverse Engineering, Decompilation and
>Disassembly. You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or
>disassemble the SOFTWARE, except and only to the extent that
>such activity is expressly permitted by applicable law
>notwithstanding this limitation.
>*******
>
>In effect:
>
>If you want to get some end-use out of these instructions,
you can run
>them on your computer, but you're not allowed to figure
out what your
>computer is doing when it runs them.
>
>Sorry, let me read that again to make sure I understood it...
>
>You are not allowed to figure out what your computer is doing!
>
>.... that's what I thought.
>
>At any time now or in the future that you set your
computer to run
>these instructions, any parts of that computer which may
reveal useful
>information about what it's actually doing, become our
sovereign
>property, and we say you can't touch or look at them.
>
>I hate to break it to the corporations, but it's my
computer and I'll
>learn whatever I want from it, and use that knowledge
however I see
>fit. The only reason I bought the hardware in the first
place is to be
>able to investigate what it does, and manipulate it to my own
>purposes, and no one is going to convince me that they own an
>instruction. I find it insulting they would even try.
>
>Owning intsructions, ha, how absurd. Next we'll have
copyrights that
>persist even after the artist is dead.
>.
>
- Next message: eagle: "RE: "Security Alert" window"
- Previous message: Ramesh [MVP]: "Re: HTML Files Edit Problem"
- In reply to: democratix: "The Most Oppressive Clause in Microsoft's EULA..."
- Next in thread: Sigfried: "Re: The Most Oppressive Clause in Microsoft's EULA..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
