SCREEEEEAAAAAMMMMM
Don't you get it? According to 15 U.S.C. 14, the language in the EULA that we're talking about is "unlawful" (as stated IN THE LAW). It means that, even if you have "agreed" to it, you actually haven't and can't, whether intentionally or due to ignorance of the law protecting you. It is unlawful to include that language in the agreement and as such the language is null and void and carries no legal weight whatsoever. We're arguing a moot point.
What really gets my goat is the thought that that text was placed in there by a lawyer. I would understand if it was put there by a dev or something, because I wouldn't expect a dev to necessarily know that the language was unlawful, but a lawyer should know better. If a lawyer put that text there it smacks of intentional deception to me and I can't abide that. If you're going to include a legal contract with your software, for God's sake be honorable about it and at least make sure the contract is lawful.
WC
|
Threaded Mode
