Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:56:26 +0100 From: B H <bernt@bah.homeip.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what happened to linuxflashplugin? Message-ID: <47B1512A.3080806@bah.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <200802111540.34420.wundram@beenic.net> References: <47AFC80B.8090303@gmail.com> <47B05924.5000405@cs.okstate.edu> <47B05C7A.80602@pacific.net.sg> <200802111540.34420.wundram@beenic.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Heiko Wundram (Beenic) skrev: > Am Montag, 11. Februar 2008 15:32:26 schrieb Erich Dollansky: > > Read this (in the license agreement): > > """... > For the avoidance of doubt, no embedded or device versions of the above > operating systems, or any other operating systems, are included as Authorized > Operating Systems. > ... > 2.1 You may install and use the Software on a single desktop or laptop > computer that runs an Authorized Operating System. A license for the Software > may not be shared, installed or used concurrently on different computers. > """ > > ...where "Authorized Operating Systems" is only Windows, Linux, Solaris and > Mac OS as defined before the initial sentence, and as such, there's no clause > that allows you to use the software on BSDs, and finally, that makes it > forbidden to use on BSDs. > > This is another reason why Flash is bad, bad, bad. Am I repeating myself? Just because something is written in a license does not make it so. I do not belive that it holds for a legal challenge.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47B1512A.3080806>