Le samedi 07 janvier 2006 à 13:05 +0100, Giuseppe Bilotta a écrit :
> Saturday, January 7, 2006 Lars D. Noodén wrote:
> 
> > Some class action suits might get MS to clean up its act somewhat, but at
> > this point it'd be foolish to expect any change in their quality or
> > business model. 
> 
> Won't work. The EULA expressely exempts MS from any damage
> caused by bugs in their programs. If you installed them, you
> have accepted the EULA.

But would all the provisions of the EULA stand in court ?
IANAL but I seem to remember european law at least requires a basic
level of service, so you can put all the exceptions you want in fine
print in the contract nobody reads, they can't preempt the general
provisions.

I doubt an EULA which stated "you accept the installation of malware
$foo on your system and I won't be liable for anything" would have any
legal value.

If someone wanted to make a MS-like EULA stick he would have to convince
the legal system the EULA provisions are consistent with what a basic
customer can expect, which would be very difficult to do. The law does
not like it at all when you say something to your customer (when you buy
MS you got support, when you buy FOSS who can you sue?) and write
something else in legal documents. All the ebayers that sell pictures of
stuff with the picture part carefully stated in fine print are in for a
very nasty surprise if someone ever sues them.

In other words : EULAs are a modern form of scam, I doubt the Law will
like them any better than the previous forms.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

Reply via email to