[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: An alternative to remailer shutdowns
On Tue, 21 May 1996, Andrew Loewenstern wrote:
> Ben Holiday <[email protected]> writes:
> > As far as I can tell an agreement of this form would be at
> > least as valid as the software licenses ("NOTICE: Opening this
> > envelope constitutes your agreement to the terms.. blah blah
> > blah") that are commonly used today.
>
> IANAL, but I have one, and he said (a couple of years ago) that these
> shrinkwrap contracts are practically worthless without a signature. At least
> this was how things were being handled in some districts. Anyone care to
> comment?
I concur.
>
> crypto relevance: Can RSADSI __really__ enforce the silly "thou shalt not
> call certain functions" restrictions in their 'license'? I doubt it, but I
> would love for someone to prove me wrong.
This is closer. You're asked to accept the terms of the license or return
the product. It's a stronger issue and more likely to be upheld.
>
> andrew
>
---
My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:[email protected]
"In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est
Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti
00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information
Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: [email protected]