EULA hounds?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tuxchick Sep 22, 2008 2:25 PM EDT |
I wish the commentary on the issues with Mozilla's licensing were not so belittling, like people are getting in a tizzy just for the fun of it. Trademarks, copyrights, and EULAs are all legal documents with teeth and real consequences if you ignore them and go "lala, whatever you say is fine!" It's especially interesting in regards to the Firefox EULA because Mozilla admitted it was full of errors. How's that for ace legal work, sheesh. Almost as ace as Google rubber-stamping their EULA on every darned thing whether it's appropriate or not, like they did with Chrome. Considering what lawyers charge for their time and alleged skills, these seem like red flags that say "Replace lawyers with new ones that pay attention." |
| azerthoth Sep 22, 2008 3:05 PM EDT |
Well at least tracyanne got quoted in the article. Congrats TA. That being said the whole thing was moot before this article was even published. There won't be a EULA. See http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080919113727960 for the rest of the story. |
| jdixon Sep 22, 2008 3:14 PM EDT |
> "Replace lawyers with new ones that pay attention." They could probably even get lots of free legal advice concerning the problem from the FSF or on Groklaw if they simply asked. Of course, the old caveat that free advice is worth what you pay for it applies. |
| tuxchick Sep 22, 2008 3:21 PM EDT |
Quoting: Of course, the old caveat that free advice is worth what you pay for it applies. It doesn't appear their paid legal services are providing any advantage. |
| hkwint Sep 22, 2008 5:46 PM EDT |
So their seems to be parallels between paid legal services and paid software support? |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!