!?!? You're kidding, right? Morality, ethics can be based on not wanting to hurt others, or it can be based on the notion that non-complicance by even a significant few can poison the well, so we should comply.
AFAI can tell, contract and civil law is neither but based on the idea that cooperation is mutually beneficial but the ultimate aim is still the success of our own ventures so if I can afford the law suit and the bad reputation, I can make the decision (one which I may legally required to due in the case of fiduciary responsibility to my investors) to break a contract. Won't loose sleep at night. Unsafe products falls into both of the first two categories. EULA complicance seems a lot more like the third. Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >No, I don't violate EULA's, at least not consciously. But with all that >legal and technical gobbledygook, I can't ever be 100% sure. Good point. But alas, that's not what we are discussing. The topic of the moment is deliberately violating specific terms of an EULA by purchasing the low-cost version of a product and using it in a way that the EULA only allows for the more-expensive version of the product. I'm sad to see us at such a moral low. Did you read about the Chinese toothpaste? Is it okay to save a nickel per unit by substituting a toxic compound for a safe compound? As a business decision it would be not okay if it caused instant death, but it would be okay if it was a slow-acting poison because then it would be hard to trace it back to the maker. How far do we go with evil being strictly a business decision? I think that if we go very far in this direction it makes all the basics of life untenable. Imagine having to take a vast testing kit with you every time you go grocery shoping. It may be a wing nuts paradise, but I don't want to live there. Today's news is that the Chinese official in charge of regulating these things has been convicted of taking bribes -- resulting in a penalty of death. Normally I'm not inclined to support a death penalty in any circumstances, but desperate means may be necessary whan a society has allowed things to go too far. Are we there yet? How about the guy with the drug-resistant TB? He was on the no-fly list so he booked on a small airline and flew through a Canadian airport. Is that okay? ************************************************************************ * ==> QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in <== * ==> the body of an email & send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <== * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ************************************************************************ * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header "X-No-Archive: yes" will not be archived ************************************************************************ ************************************************************************ * ==> QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in <== * ==> the body of an email & send 'em to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <== * Join the list: SUBSCRIBE COMPUTERGUYS-L Your Name * Too much mail? Try Daily Digests command: SET COMPUTERGUYS-L DIGEST * Tired of the List? Unsubscribe command: SIGNOFF COMPUTERGUYS-L * New address? From OLD address send: CHANGE COMPUTERGUYS-L YourNewAddress * Need more help? Send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ************************************************************************ * List archive at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/ * RSS at www.mail-archive.com/computerguys-l@listserv.aol.com/maillist.xml * Messages bearing the header "X-No-Archive: yes" will not be archived ************************************************************************
