Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 6th Apr 2009 14:25 UTC
We almost had another small riot over the EULA Google uses for its Chrome web browser. On Slashdot, the editors posted an anonymous submission that questioned Google's policies as defined in the EULA used by Chrome. Slashdot readers quickly corrected the wrong assumptions by the anonymous poster, and Google jumped in on its corporate blog to clarify the "issue".
Post a Comment
Member since:
2008-07-15
Member since:
2005-06-29
Member since:
2008-08-19
Member since:2005-07-13
Member since:
2005-07-24
Someone noticed that Google's EULA allows them to do all sorts of nefarious things. Google agrees that it does, but says it wouldn't do that, declining to change the EULA because it is important to maintain the same terms, which allow them to do all sorts of nefarious things, across their entire line of products. There is a real story here. Why are we being so dismissive?
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-06
Why are you always this anal retentive? If you have an ax to grind with Google, troll elsewhere.
It's a shame more people don't ask some simple questions when things like this pop up. You wouldn't be so dismissive if they used their generic 'Terms of Service' to block sites you want to view now would you? And it's not just the browser I'm talking about.
Freedoms and rights are typically lost one piece at a time so you barely notice. An ambiguous comment here...a sweeping statement there... so it's good to know there are people out there willing to stand up and have large corporations justify what they're doing to keep them honest.
