Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
If I were in New York state I'd probably be inclined to ignore the "no benchmarks" clauses in the license agreements, at least for now. As I understand it this may be subject to change under the UCITA law being pushed by the software companies, which would strengthen click-through "agreements". The fact is that I live just down the street from MS headquarters in Washington, and I certainly can't afford to take on the most innovative legal team in the industry. :-) I honestly didn't mean to start a flame war on this topic. I'm certainly not a fan of MS, but they're hardly alone in having this sort of clause in their license agreement. Sun actually had a clause like this in an early version of the Java license, though that's long since been dropped. Meanwhile, I've asked one of the main Microsoft participants on this list if he can direct me to someone with the power to give permission for a benchmark with public results. - Dennis Jeff Lowery wrote: >This case may be applicable: > >http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/18/149224&mode=thread > >If it's a BETA license agreement, that could be a different kettle of fish. >Those licenses often have nondisclosure clauses: you're granted the >privilege of using the beta as long as you keep quiet about the >(mis)features. Those a court would probably uphold. > >Of course there's the cost of attorney's should you get sued even >frivolously, so... > > > >
|
