Sounds similar to the agreements and acceptable use policy of Gmail. Gmail attempts to hold the user to a higher standard than the company itself is held to. For example, Gmail states that it limits the property rights of the e-mail consumer but does not limit its own liability if Gmail abuses it. In other words if a customer of Gmail passes confidential or corporate secrets, even if legitimate, it may be a violation of acceptable use. Gmail at the same time limits its liability in maintaining any control over any of its own processes. This to my way of thinking leaves the consumer liable by holding them to a higher standard but seems completely unenforceable.

What about shrink-wrap licenses?

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/257/27681#27681