briany at qldlearning.com
Sat Mar 21 04:25:20 EDT 2009
Beside your questionable grasp of the law, you are making a straw man
argument. Even if "reasonable man" arguments worked as simply as you
imagine, it wouldn't follow that everything in a EULA other than
copyright is unenforceable. Believe it or not, licensing agreements
cover things other than copyright and sometimes are even upheld.
Furthermore, being "right" doesn't necessarily keep a small business
from being put out of business by a lawsuit. Often times the larger
entity just needs enough collateral damage (even in losing the case)
to ruin you.
It seems like you have been reading too much SlashDot and running too
> I didnt know i was conversing with people from north korea and
> iran. In the us, japan, canada, mexico, brazil, iceland, south
> africa, russia, israel, india, and most of europe, etc. There is a
> difference between criminal law and civil contract law. In most
> moderen democratic societies, the wording in product contracts are
> considdered about as binding as santa or the stuff car salesmen say
> right before they go off to "talk to the manager". And that is
> because of a liile thing called "the reasonable man". This
> basically means that a contract or law cannot be inforced if it goes
> outside of what would be reasonably considdered fair. Ant that is
> because guys sitting behind big expensive oak drsks making big
> salaries baid for by big companies can not be assumed to ever act
> like reasonable men (bias and conflict of interest is a given).
> Criminal law on the other hand is written by people we vote for and
> require to "uphold the constitution". No such standerd is expected
> in contract law. The only thing you can be expected to do when you
> purchace software is to not copy and sell it. The rest is
> hilariously written bs and the court treats it as so. Sorry. The
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Ruslan Zasukhin" <sunshine at public.kherson.ua>
> To: "use-revolution" <use-revolution at lists.runrev.com>
> Sent: 3/21/2009 12:13 AM
> Subject: Re: illegal creativity?
> On 3/21/09 4:13 AM, "Randall Reetz" <randall at randallreetz.com> wrote:
>> All mosquitos are relevant. It is scale that matters here. Scale
>> reality. Else all of us would be behind bars and prohibited from
>> buying crest
>> toothpaste. Fair use and happy customers build brand loyalty
>> faster than fear
>> and loathing. Not only that, customer inovation and parasitic
>> coevolution is
>> a sign of health and currency. The lawyers play second fiddle to
>> the guys in
>> marketing and sales.
> I will add 2 cents ONCE.
> If you vote publicly to break EULA of product which you have buy, then
> excuse me -- you publicly cry that you are a criminal man.
> Please understand this.
> When you buy a product you read its EULA and say AGREE.
> I.e. You PROMISE follow it. You have give your honest word.
> If you do not like EULA of product then you should not buy it or use
> EULA is kind of "contract" between vendor and YOU.
> If you say publicly that you is ready break your own
> small contract/EULA = law
> Then we can assume you can say go head, do not follow laws of your
> at all? Go and kill? Go and stole things from people?
> I do not think you ready say this :)
> EULA is also small law.
> IF your product not fit limits of EULA of some product always
> possible talk
> to vendor and negotiate some special contract with conditions your
> needs. Easy and valid way.
> Also your idea that break EULA and they can buy you is FALSE.
> Competition? Right Randall. IF company have write into EULA some
> limits then
> obviously company thinks that break of this limits can hurt it market.
> Company is not stupid to prohibit something that will looks like value
> addition to its market. Clear? :-)
> Best regards,
> Ruslan Zasukhin
> VP Engineering and New Technology
> Paradigma Software, Inc
> Valentina - Joining Worlds of Information
> [I feel the need: the need for speed]
More information about the Use-livecode