Do you know what you agreed to?
by Volker Weber
Somehow this slipped over the weekend, but it's never too late to post.
Of course you did not read the license agreement, that Microsoft presents when you install Windows XP Home. Now read this translation into plain english and shudder. Amongst the things you agreed to are:
- If you share files or printers with other computers in your house, you are not allowed to share with more than 5 other computers.
- You agree that at any time, and at the request of “content providers” Microsoft may disable certain features on your computer, such as the ability to play your music or movie files.
- You agree that Microsoft can automatically and without your consent put new software on your computer.
- You do not have the right to do anything with Windows XP Home not covered by this EULA.
- Microsoft (and anyone else chosen by Microsoft) may collect information about your computer and may share it with other companies, but this should not include personal information about you.
Did you notice you don't agree to any such things when you install Ubuntu?
Comments
and the same goes with apple...read their EULA? There is no one to sue when it comes to Ubuntu and Linux in general. The point why the companies are putting this into the EULA is simply that they don't want to get sued in any circumstances.
Remember when a guy sued a caravan company because he crashed his new caravan while driving and making a coffee in the back of his caravan...?
If this is the worst the EULA has to offer it doesn't sound too bad. The only thing really troubling is the "install new software" part, the rest is either well known (sharing is limited in XP home) or could be expected (the video-part which sounds a lot like they tried to get DRM into the EULA).
Also, there are worse agreements. Ever read the Apple Shop Privacy Statement? It pretty much says "We're going to sell all your data to anybody who will pay us for it".
It just doesn't matter in Germany! In fact you DO NOT agree to that, you only make it disappear by clicking "yes" because you want to run the software you bought. That's a difference.
It's kind of a shrink wrap license that's not further relevant in Germany. For further information (in German): http://hiegl.net/archives/395
There is a reason, this post is in english. And this would be a link to your post. ;-)
Martin, it does matter in Europe as well. It is the same for all privacy rights: the existence of "a law" does not protect you, it simply holds up a finger "though shall not" with a penality warning.
I remember the statement of a German law firm which linked it's offices nationwide via ISDN routers in the mid 90s. When told that the routers are not protected (default password, no network protection, access to all client files), they answered, "maybe, but it is illegal to intrude our systems." ;-)
If your data is sold outside your home country by a foreign company, what do you do? Send them an email "based on European laws, you are not allowed to sell my data"?
As Andrew Pollack mentioned in his misplaced comment (to "Made to break"), the EULAs have not yet really been challenged anywhere. Until recently end users could simply ignore all the restrictions imposed by a EULA. With DMA, trusted computing, internet certifying and authentification, root kits etc, the restrictions are not anylonger just words, they are an integral part of the product. So will the EULAs finally be challenged in courts or/and will customers consciously choose less restrictive products and therefore exercise market pressure?
Volker, is this EULA really operative in the US? OMG, that would be really ... scary.
Moritz you missed my point. You can behave like there was no EULA at all, due to the fact, that it is not operative here. That means you can share your stuff with as many computers as you want, even brazillions ;-). All the restrictions in there are made for /dev/null, pardon, the recycle bin of course.
Microsoft cannot sue you for "breaking" them. You on the other hand can sue Microsoft if you've got proof they did something that may be in the EULA, but is against German privacy law. You don't give up your rights by clicking "yes".
With downloaded software it's another thing of course. There they may be operative - depends on the content.
"You do not have the right to do anything with Windows XP Home not covered by this EULA."
Does that mean, if I find some innovative software, that allows me to do something, that MS didn't anticipate in their EULA, that's illegal? Now that would be seriously stupid non-sense.
Martin, I agree that chances are good that this particular MS EULA is not valid in Europe, that's not the point. BTW, of course a company can sue you for any infringement on terms and conditions (AGBs in Germany). Rightly or wrongly is a decision of the court.
"You don't give up your rights by clicking 'yes' ". MMhhh. If the license agreement is found to be against European / German law, especially regarding privacy issues, I'd agree. But first, somebody needs to challenge such a license, until then...
Privacy legislation is not preventing abuse. So if in a license agreement somebody reserves the (maybe illegal) right to exploit you private data, maybe one should better assume that they do exactly that.
And finally, remember the case of Dmitry Sklyarov. Being a European living and working in Europe (or wherever else) does not prevent you from being legally persecuted in the US.
BTW, of course a company can sue you for any infringement on terms and conditions (AGBs in Germany). Rightly or wrongly is a decision of the court.First it is a thing of law and decisions that were already made. Ask any lawyer you know. He will tell you the same as I did. No company will sue you for anything they know - and that's the crazy point in here - that it is not operative.
So if in a license agreement somebody reserves the (maybe illegal) right to exploit you private data, maybe one should better assume that they do exactly that.Well, I agree in that of course.
Post a comment
Recent comments
Alex Wokurka
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 23:14
Ragnar Schierholz
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 23:02
Volker Weber
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 21:53
Ben Poole
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 21:07
Pieterjan Lansbergen
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 21:03
Jan Tietze
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 20:48
Ben Rose
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 15:14
Ben Rose
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 14:46
Philipp Sury
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 13:40
Sascha Reissner
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 13:28
Ben Rose
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 12:10
Colin Williams
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 09:43
Adalbert Duda
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 09:33
Volker Weber
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 09:28
Jan Tietze
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 08:53
Ben Rose
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 08:14
Volker Weber
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 04:50
Amy Blumenfield
on No surprises at the PhilNote at 01:36
Richard Schwartz
on Peter O'Kelly: I am now a Microsoft employee at 02:49
Hanno Zulla
on Ente Chop Sui at 22:32
Kristof Doffing
on Ich helfe gerne aus der Autokrise at 15:03
Bruce Lill
on IBM is not going to send out a press release at 00:31
Thomas Cloer
on Events of the last few days at 12:38
David M Taylor
on Two screens or one? at 03:27
Henrik Heigl
on Events of the last few days at 18:51
Click here to subscribe
