From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 7 00:32:09 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF1E3106564A for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 00:32:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from tower.berklix.org (tower.berklix.org [83.236.223.114]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38BD58FC0C for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 00:32:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mart.js.berklix.net (p5DCBF89A.dip.t-dialin.net [93.203.248.154]) (authenticated bits=0) by tower.berklix.org (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id q570W7RH039441; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 00:32:08 GMT (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from fire.js.berklix.net (fire.js.berklix.net [192.168.91.41]) by mart.js.berklix.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q570W1Nx008814; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 02:32:01 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from fire.js.berklix.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fire.js.berklix.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q570VhqW097184; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 02:31:55 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jhs@fire.js.berklix.net) Message-Id: <201206070031.q570VhqW097184@fire.js.berklix.net> To: Matthew Seaman From: "Julian H. Stacey" Organization: http://berklix.com BSD Unix Linux Consultancy, Munich Germany User-agent: EXMH on FreeBSD http://berklix.com/free/ X-URL: http://www.berklix.com In-reply-to: Your message "Wed, 06 Jun 2012 18:55:19 BST." <4FCF9987.6080803@infracaninophile.co.uk> Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 02:31:43 +0200 Sender: jhs@berklix.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 00:32:09 -0000 > > (cf. EULA) that you accept those "licensing of hardware". > Also, I think you'll find that such actions are already illegal > certainly in the UK, and I believe EU wide. Yes illegal for English law (England & Scotland have different contract laws). Contract terms given after money changes hands are Not part of contract. (Reasonable Eh ?) Case law since in UK, NCP National Car Park lost an appeals court decision on their nasty disclaimers visible only after you'd paid to enter car park. (PS Matthew, I noticed in Canterbury NCP built an escape lane in their car park after. So one could then queue up to park, theoreticaly block the lane, & read super fast all the disclaimers, before deciding to either pay & enter or take the sharp curve out. I've always hoped all the (usually American) legal rubbish in the sealed packages I bought in Germany were on same principle irrelevant, (but no idea). USA companies later learnt to ship with front page in transparent bags, but still not usualy readable till after purchase. Maybe USA "restraint of trade" laws could penalise a monopolist working to convert a market to sell computers that (if amd64) have been been crippled to only work with associate bsuiness partners ? Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com Reply below not above, cumulative like a play script, & indent with "> ". Format: Plain text. Not HTML, multipart/alternative, base64, quoted-printable. Mail from @yahoo dumped @berklix. http://berklix.org/yahoo/