Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 17th Feb 2006 12:41 UTC, submitted by jayson.knight
Permalink for comment 96684
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-14
Just because some company prints it on paper it does make it true.
The laws of a lot of countries put limit to what a contract can impose on the customer. If a clause is considered vexatory the customer has to agree to it SPECIFICALLY (with ANOTHER signature).
And still (even if a clause was agreed), a judge can rule a clause null because it imposes illegal restrictions no matter what. It happens all the time.
And EULAs are pretty much all void and null in the European Union. Tested in court many times, expecially in Germany.