> At 7:46 pm +0100 9/4/99, Chris White wrote: > >> Most of the things you'll find in the average software license agreement > >> are unenforcable in the UK. > [...] > >>they are not allowed to reduce the > >> consumer's rights below a certain minimum threshold as defined by UK law. > > > >If you agree to a aggreement of any kind , (even if printed on back of > >software) you are bound by that aggreement. > > Depends on the circumstances. I don't think UK law courts will accept any > sort of "implicit" agreement. For a start, you need to have installed and > tested the software for a while before you can be certain that the software > correctly performs the required functions.
If it states that by opening this you aggree to the following , then its upto the USER if they wish to proceed , If they don't aggree then don't use , or take your arguement to court before you open/use that way IF you lose you will have lost nothing :) Please see below :) > On the safe side, a contract which actually reduces the consumer's rights > would have to be signed before it would become legally binding. > > >>They might therefore > >> try to argue that by doing any of this you are in breach of your > >agreement, > >> but since you haven't signed anything there's no danger there either. > > > >You are only alloud to use the item in the manner that it was desgined for , > >there is a consumer law from 1971 that states QUOTE - " You are entitled to > >a full refund , if said item does not perform the task that it was original > >purchase to do" , > > Hang about just a minute.... that law obliges the software company to > guarantee that the program will do the job it was designed to do. It places > no restrictions whatsoever on the consumer, who can try and get the > software to do whatever he likes. :) BELOW No , the law states that you bought a (for instance) , a game and was told it would help you do word processing you could get a full (in whatever you paid in refund) , so say you bought a word processor that had a spell checker in it , but it only check for US syntac , you could get a full refund > > So you should never have to reverse-engineer/modify or > >copy as if it fails in work or opertate as expected you just get your cash > >back? > > I'm not sure I see what point you're making here. > > If I'd paid for a program which simply didn't do its job, I would complain > until I got my money back. If the program mostly worked, but one little bit > needed tweaking and the programmers were unwilling to do that, I might fix > it if it were within my ability to do so. But you need not as if you bought it for the slightly unworking part , you are entitled to a fix (if sold stating it does this) or refund . > >Big for instance , if you modfied a piece of > >software and then sold you machine (With all software as required by law) , > >then said modified software cause damage to machine who is liable? > > What exactly do you mean? I know of no such law, that requires me to bundle > software if I sell my computer. If you bought a computer then some software and you sold the computer , if it has software on it you MUST by law pass on the original etc.... > If I did include software, I'd have to include the licenses (many of which, > incidentally, try to claim to be non-transferable, and that is also not > allowed in the UK) and not keep any copies myself, but that is another > issue entirely. > > If I did sell a machine including a modified program, then I would be > distributing a modified copy and that would be breaking UK law. Correct modifing software is breaking the law :) (Would get the jury on that one) > >> > Having a backup of a disk thats not used for illegal > >> >purposes , is like have a gun and NEVER thinks of firing it (Pointless) > >> > >> Invalid analogy. You've never ever had a corrupted disk then? > > > >Yes i have and i have got a Full Replacement from the Publisher , Take my > >current cause , Roller Coaster Tycoon has a BIG problem with Daylight saving > >time , and I am supposed to DLOAD/Buy a Mag with fix on it , But I will not > >and have sent back to Publisher for a Correct Version , as its fawed. > > You're attacking the wrong question. Your copy of RCT was flawed, the > software itself contained bugs, and the publisher is responsible for > providing a working copy. A backup doesn't come into play here, because it > would contain the same software, and therefore the same bugs. > > Let's say you buy a fully working copy of RCT. What would happen, in three > year's time, if you accidentally scratched that CD, and it no longer > loaded? The publisher, if they were even still in business, would be > unlikely to see it as their problem and would almost certainly not provide > you with a free replacement. If you wanted to play the game again, you'd > probably have to buy another copy unless you'd previously made a backup, in > which case there wouldn't be a problem. Accidenally scratching a CD is neglect on USERS part, if however the media fail (Which some cheap CDS do after a few years (I got some of my own that no longer work) > >>Sometimes I will remove > >>protection, like the one on SamPaint which just became tedious after > >> a while (and actually only took me about 90 seconds to remove). > > > >Then if SAY, some else took a copy of you unprotect version without out your > >consent you have help reduce money going to the author > > This is true, and the publisher would in that event probably have a good > case against me for negligence. I should take more care to ensure that the > modifications are not distributed, because the distribution of the > modifications is illegal. However, actually making the modifications in the > first place, is certainly not. In theory yes , but you have in effect , modify a Copyright product and it is no longer in original form, which is against the Copyright owners wishes and rights! Chirs
