Have you seen the comments in TFA?
1. Slashdot meme: "Panaqqa: CTO, Panaqqa Inc. I for one welcome our Bayesian filtering stupidity aware overlords!"
6. Slashdot meme: "In soviet russia... stupid filters you!"
20. A stupid filter? *do not want*... Oh hang on... yes I do
This filter is USELESS!
You omit the most important reason for a sentence: to maintain, within a community, the collective conscience of the general validity of a rule. This is not deterrence, because with deterrence you avoid to have someone else committing a crime. This is about keeping our TRUST IN OUR LAW SYSTEM AS A WHOLE. And that's the most important reason here why this grandmother must serve in jail the rest of her life.
1. This is not about punishing the winner of a competition. This is about protecting us, consumers, from the winner's abuses, when he already won. MS can charge 500 USD for their software, if they want to, because they are a monopoly. And, when you build a monopoly, there is nobody able to compete (even if you have all the genius by your side) because the monopolist will crush you with its money. This is the real reason for a Sherman Act and things like that.
2. I don't know if Linux is really the best desktop out there. The problem here is, nobody knows, because you have a monopolist acting with a strong market power, distorting our choices. When you have a distorted market, you must level the field to keep a fair competition, through regulation. Then, with a leveled playing field, you can realistically say: "Hey, which one is better? GNOME? Windows? KDE? Mac? Amiga? Ratpoison?".
Finally, I agree with you in one point. Microsoft is a market winner, after all. But, will you give a winner the right to screw our lives for the rest of the eternity? Nobody would grant any winner a prize like that, after all. And that's the point behind regulation.
From my research, I've found interesting things. First of all, AUTODESK'S EULA IS NOWHERE TO BE FOUND. The Autodesk page, supposedly publishing the EULA, ended with an EULA located on a non-working server. The only thing close to an actual Autocad or Maya EULA I found is here: http://www.evanyares.com/licensing/2005/12/13/autocad-2006-eula.html (it's a SHAME that this is the only way I can read the EULA of a supposedly serious software company... Is the EULA a secret? How can you claim I agree with the EULA if I can't even read it?)
Second, some terms are interesting.
2.1 License Grant. Autodesk grants You a non-sublicensable, non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited license to use copies of the Software in the jurisdiction in which you acquire the Software, in accordance with the applicable User Documentation, within the scope of the License Parameters. Autodesk's license grant is conditioned on Your continuous compliance with all license limitations and restrictions described in this Agreement. If You violate any of these limitations or restrictions, the license grant will automatically and immediately expire. The license descriptions in this Section 2 define the scope of rights that Autodesk grants to You. Any usage of the Software outside the scope of the applicable license grant constitutes an infringement of Autodesk's intellectual property rights as well as a material breach of this Agreement.
What kind of contract is this? It's a licence, of course. And why are giving this licence to operate in a specific COUNTRY? (the jurisdiction in which you acquire the Software) Does it mean that, if I travel with a laptop loaded with a legal copy of Autocad 2006 (the license for Autocad 2008 isn't available) from Chile to the States, I have to pay another CLP$ 2.000.000 to keep my legal status?
9.2. Choice of Law. This Agreement and any disputes arising out of or in connection with this Agreement shall be governed by California law without reference to conflict-of-laws principles and excluding the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods.
9.4. Severability. If and to the extent any provision of this Agreement is held illegal, invalid, or unenforceable in whole or in part under applicable law, such provision or such portion thereof shall be ineffective as to the jurisdiction in which it is illegal, invalid, or unenforceable to the extent of its illegality, invalidity, or unenforceability and shall be deemed modified to the extent necessary to conform to applicable law so as to give the maximum effect to the intent of the parties. The illegality, invalidity, or unenforceability of such provision in that jurisdiction shall not in any way affect the legality, validity, or enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement in any other jurisdiction.
That is, if your country doesn't have a sane conflict-of-law statute and doesn't forbid you transferring jurisdiction to California, you are essentially screwed.
9.1. No Assignment; Insolvency. This Agreement and any rights hereunder are non-assignable and any purported assignment shall be void. The Agreement and the licenses granted hereunder shall terminate without further notice or action by Autodesk if You become bankrupt or insolvent, make an arrangement with Your creditors or go into liquidation.
See what your legislation says about what we call "adhesive contracts" (contracts where one part writes the contract, and the other one, with a lower power to negotiate conditions, only signs. One kind of these "adhesive contracts" would be shrink-wrap contracts), and look carefully if THIS ONE IS FORBIDDEN. Why do they require your solvency? Is it relevant?
6.3 Educational Institutional and Student Versions. WORK PRODUCT AND OTHER DATA CREATED WITH EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL VERSIONS AND STUDENT VERSIONS OF THE SOFTWARE CONTAINS CERTAIN NOTICES AND LIMITA
Slashdot Mirror
Have you seen the comments in TFA? 1. Slashdot meme: "Panaqqa: CTO, Panaqqa Inc. I for one welcome our Bayesian filtering stupidity aware overlords!" 6. Slashdot meme: "In soviet russia... stupid filters you!" 20. A stupid filter? *do not want* ... Oh hang on... yes I do
This filter is USELESS!
You omit the most important reason for a sentence: to maintain, within a community, the collective conscience of the general validity of a rule. This is not deterrence, because with deterrence you avoid to have someone else committing a crime. This is about keeping our TRUST IN OUR LAW SYSTEM AS A WHOLE. And that's the most important reason here why this grandmother must serve in jail the rest of her life.
You are COMPLETELY WRONG. Class action lawsuits feed lawyers and enable them to buy BMWs. They are worthy for sure.
2. I don't know if Linux is really the best desktop out there. The problem here is, nobody knows, because you have a monopolist acting with a strong market power, distorting our choices. When you have a distorted market, you must level the field to keep a fair competition, through regulation. Then, with a leveled playing field, you can realistically say: "Hey, which one is better? GNOME? Windows? KDE? Mac? Amiga? Ratpoison?".
Finally, I agree with you in one point. Microsoft is a market winner, after all. But, will you give a winner the right to screw our lives for the rest of the eternity? Nobody would grant any winner a prize like that, after all. And that's the point behind regulation.
This is beginning to look like Megaman. Watch this. "On 20XX, the year of the Linux Desktop"...
Sí, claro. Por lo menos hablemos en uno de los (pocos) lenguajes que sobrevivirá por 150 años más. Es más útil ;).
Second, some terms are interesting.
2.1 License Grant. Autodesk grants You a non-sublicensable, non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited license to use copies of the Software in the jurisdiction in which you acquire the Software, in accordance with the applicable User Documentation, within the scope of the License Parameters. Autodesk's license grant is conditioned on Your continuous compliance with all license limitations and restrictions described in this Agreement. If You violate any of these limitations or restrictions, the license grant will automatically and immediately expire. The license descriptions in this Section 2 define the scope of rights that Autodesk grants to You. Any usage of the Software outside the scope of the applicable license grant constitutes an infringement of Autodesk's intellectual property rights as well as a material breach of this Agreement.
What kind of contract is this? It's a licence, of course. And why are giving this licence to operate in a specific COUNTRY? (the jurisdiction in which you acquire the Software) Does it mean that, if I travel with a laptop loaded with a legal copy of Autocad 2006 (the license for Autocad 2008 isn't available) from Chile to the States, I have to pay another CLP$ 2.000.000 to keep my legal status?
9.2. Choice of Law. This Agreement and any disputes arising out of or in connection with this Agreement shall be governed by California law without reference to conflict-of-laws principles and excluding the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods.
9.4. Severability. If and to the extent any provision of this Agreement is held illegal, invalid, or unenforceable in whole or in part under applicable law, such provision or such portion thereof shall be ineffective as to the jurisdiction in which it is illegal, invalid, or unenforceable to the extent of its illegality, invalidity, or unenforceability and shall be deemed modified to the extent necessary to conform to applicable law so as to give the maximum effect to the intent of the parties. The illegality, invalidity, or unenforceability of such provision in that jurisdiction shall not in any way affect the legality, validity, or enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement in any other jurisdiction.
That is, if your country doesn't have a sane conflict-of-law statute and doesn't forbid you transferring jurisdiction to California, you are essentially screwed.
9.1. No Assignment; Insolvency. This Agreement and any rights hereunder are non-assignable and any purported assignment shall be void. The Agreement and the licenses granted hereunder shall terminate without further notice or action by Autodesk if You become bankrupt or insolvent, make an arrangement with Your creditors or go into liquidation.
See what your legislation says about what we call "adhesive contracts" (contracts where one part writes the contract, and the other one, with a lower power to negotiate conditions, only signs. One kind of these "adhesive contracts" would be shrink-wrap contracts), and look carefully if THIS ONE IS FORBIDDEN. Why do they require your solvency? Is it relevant?
6.3 Educational Institutional and Student Versions. WORK PRODUCT AND OTHER DATA CREATED WITH EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL VERSIONS AND STUDENT VERSIONS OF THE SOFTWARE CONTAINS CERTAIN NOTICES AND LIMITA