Frank Cox wrote:
On Wed, 10 May 2006 18:18:33 -0400 (EDT)
"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
i can't imagine any legal basis for MS demanding the
right to wander in and start doing an audit.
It's my understanding that the ability to walk in and audit with or without
cause is part of the license agreement that you enter into with MS when you
give them your money.
I'm not sure if it would be binding when it is just part of the EULA that comes
in a box, but it would be binding on those companies who have actual signed
contracts with MS for one thing and another.
So I'd imagine that they do have a relatively strong legal case that they do
have a right to bust down your door, so to speak.
I don't use MS software (or any Windows stuff) at all, and I like it that way.
This is one more reason to add to my list of "glad I got out of there years
ago."
The point is how many people actually read and understand the EULA. I
wonder how many people realize the rights that they hand to MS when they
click on the agree or install their latest version of XP.
This is an interesting question as this was posted just a few days ago.
http://linuxadvocate.org/articles.php?p=1
You cannot even boot a new computer without agreeing to the EULA. The
service tech may do it in advance and you, as a user may never see it.
It has happened to me.
--
Robin Laing
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
