Slashdot Mirror
Reading Google Chrome's Fine Print
Much ink and many electrons are being spilled over Google's Chrome browser (discussed here twice in recent days): from deep backgrounders to performance benchmarks to its vulnerability to a carpet-bombing flaw. The latest angle to be explored is Chrome's end-user license agreement. It does not look consumer-friendly. "By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any content which you submit, post or display on or through, the services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."
Which EULA would that be? The one linked in the article? Oh wait, the article doesn't actually link to any EULA.
Chrome's "EULA" may be found here. It consists principally of this sentence:
The Chromium software and sample code developed by Google is licensed under the BSD license.
I therefore conclude that TFA is a figment of the imagination of its author.
I would like to assume that the author of TFA is deluded rather than a shill; unfortunately, the list of Ina Fried's articles for CNET tends to suggest otherwise.