[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: I Agree buttons, GAKzilla & liability.
On Fri, 1 Dec 1995 [email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Dec 1995, Brian Davis wrote:
> > Well that would depend on the terms of the agreement to hold the escrowed
> > keys, wouldn't it? And presumably the GAK keyholder will have lawyers
> > write the agreement so that it says, in essence, "we will try really
> > really hard not to let the keys out, but if they get out, our only
> > liability if to say 'Ooops' followed by a heartfelt apology!"
> This sounds like the fine print you "agree" to by opening commercial software
> packages. Hasn't this been found void in a couple of places? The "OK" or
"I agree" that shrinkwrapped licenses are problematic, at best. I don't
think the analogy applies, though. Maybe I'm mixing threads up, but I
thought the topic was "Why would anyone agree to escrow keys commercially
-- given the high risk if the keys get out?"
If that is the topic, then the keys would be escrowed by one of two
parties: the software developer or the customer. If the customer does
it, through an active act on his part, then no problem -- he's expressly
consented (not a "shrinkwrap license" problem in my view if he send them
his key ...).
If the software developer gives the key to the C/GAK escrow agent, then
all that should be necessary is to warn the consumer that there is a
backdoor through the escrowed key. Then the consumer can buy the product
or not, but knows what he is getting so can make a choice.
As long as the escrow aspect is not hidden, I don't see any fraud. The
remedy is the marketplace. It is a long fall from $5,000,000,000 ...
> "I Agree" buttons I'm forced to press (but you don't *have* to download
> software, nya,nya,nya...) when downloading wares also comes to mind.
> Has this been tested in a court? (Sega's reverse engineering suit from
> a while back comes to mind)
> Pressing buttons is hardly the same as your notarized handwritten signature
> on paper (we prefer blood, it's more permanent), or its digital equivalent.
> Mere tokenism, not insurance.
> About JR's concern about Netscape's shareholders, they're playing a bubble
> market and they know it. I wish them all the money and luck; luck is
> something they're gonna need if this is to go on.
> Ps. Netmanage websurfer ain't so bad, hint, hint, hint (detraction time
Not a lawyer on the Net, although I play one in real life.
Flame away! I get treated worse in person every day!!