Username or EmailPassword
nobody is putting a gun to your head to license software. This is a choice you make. If a company does something or demands something that is unacceptable for you, don't freakin use it.
The GPL is free code that requires you to change how you license your code if you use it. I don't think anyone here thinks thats wrong, even though that power goes WAY beyond the power a person would have if they sold you something. When Linksys (for example) broke the terms of the license, nobody said that the GPL should be overturned, they wanted the freakin code, because if Linksys didn't want to abide by the terms of the GPL, they shouldn't have used it.
What is the difference between stallman demanding you change the license of something he has nothing to do with, and autodesk demanding you destroy something you legally bought? one is a loveable hippy, the other is a heartless multinational.
I'm not saying that autodesk is good or right or anything like that. I am saying that people need to stop deluding themselves about these things. Buying software, movies, books, etc are not the same thing as buying a loaf of bread, your rights are very very different. If the company is demanding too much, write them an email explaining why you didn't buy their product. If enough people do that, things will change.
one is a loveable hippy
There is nothing loveable about him, though.
Yeah, I was trying to make a point. I think the guy is a dick too :-). as an aside, I ran across this just yesterday http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ
I'm not against the concept of licensing software.
I'm against the shady business practice of masquerading the licensing of software as a sale. Luckily, I live in a sane world, and this shit won't fly in Europe, because it's a post-sale restriction.
If software "vendors" (LOL) want to do this right, then they ought to present the license as part of the "sale" (LOL), both on their website, as well as through their re"sellers" (LOL).
But they don't. As such, EULAs can suck my big fat popcicle. I just can't understand people supporting these shady business practices. You're basically shooting yourself in your own foot!
Also, I'm 100% certain even these judges broke an EULA at least once.
So basically, youre saying that putting up a bajillion pages of legalese with an ok button isn't enough to indicate that this is different then buying a sandwich.
How about more "intangible" software? Like paying for rememberthemilk.com or something like that. There is no physical anything changing hands, but you are still going to get that gigantic license agreement you have to agree with.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, just sort of curious where you draw the line.
Hmmm...I'm pretty sure you have previously stated that you had been told by a law professor in NL that EULA's are legal there too. It would seems that at least one part of Europe is as fucked as the U.S.
Of course, EULA's can't over-ride your local consumer laws anyway so it's not a disaster.
GPL is about licencing, that is what the L stands for.
I was using books and cds as an example of a purchase with additional restrictions. If I buy bread, I can photocopy it. If I buy a book, I can't photocopy it. You have different rights depending on what you buy.
Well, let's say you write a 10000 line program, but in that program you use 100 lines of GPL code somebody else wrote. Then you relase the binary. According to the GPL, you now have to release your entire code base under GPL, even if your plan was to keep it closed source.
If a company does something or demands something that is unacceptable for you, don't freakin use it.
No, there is another alternative. Find out if this clause is lawful, under the law of contract in the jurisdiction in question. Not all are.