🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <907621527snz@vision25.demon.co.uk>, Phil Hunt
<philh@vision25.demon.co.uk> writes
>I suspect in practise you are wrong here. MS can afford more expensive
>lawyers than me, and can afford to drag out a legal case forever.

I note that you are in the UK, as am I. Are you not aware that MS has
already pulled out from one lawsuite in the UK related to their
licensing terms becuase they were advised that they had no chance of
upholding the license. 

They settled out of court (If I remember correctly) for �500 being the
value of the damage done to someone's system by unauthorised actions of
their software.

The MS EULA's non-copyright specific restrictions are mostly invalid in
the UK. If MS were ever to take a case all the way to court and loose
they would have to re-write all their licenses for UK customers.

There is also the question of whether ANY part of a MS EULA is valid in
the UK as for a contract to be binding in England and Wales (not so in
Scotland) both parties have to know who each other are at the time the
contract becomes binding and MS have NO WAY TO KNOW that you have just
bought from a shop and opened a copy of MS Windows of any other MS
product.
-- 
Jason Clifford
Definite Linux Systems
htp://definite.ukpost.com/