, 2006-11-20
Mark Rasch looks at the license agreement for Windows Vista and how its product activation component, which can disable operation of the computer, may be like walking on thin ice.
Expand all |
Post comment
Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries
2006-11-21
FatHed (4 replies)
FatHed (4 replies)
Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries
2006-11-21
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Why none of this matters
2006-11-21
Jake (7 replies)
Jake (7 replies)
Re: Why none of this matters
2006-11-22
Mark D. Rasch (1 replies)
Mark D. Rasch (1 replies)
Where was Rasch four years ago, and what degree in Law does he have?
2006-11-22
Gordon Fecyk (3 replies)
Gordon Fecyk (3 replies)
Re: Where was Rasch four years ago, and what degree in Law does he have?
2006-11-22
Mark D. Rasch (1 replies)
Mark D. Rasch (1 replies)
Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries
2006-11-22
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
What No-one Else Has Noticed
2006-11-24
Anonymous (2 replies)
Anonymous (2 replies)
Haven't seen those "happy feet" marching off yet for 4 years
2006-11-26
Gordon fecyk (2 replies)
Gordon fecyk (2 replies)
Re: Haven't seen those "happy feet" marching off yet for 4 years
2006-12-12
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries
2006-12-05
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
Re: Vista's EULA Product Activation Worries
2007-01-05
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)

So in your 24 year legal opinion, say, in the state of Wisconsin, I can sue Symantec when Norton Antivirus stops working after my subscription runs out? Or if I move my installation to another PC? Is Symantec practicing 'self-help' in this case?
Once again: Pot, Kettle, Black, Rasch?
And what if it fails to catch a new virus after it runs out? Oh wait, it already fails to catch new viruses by its design... never mind.
[ reply ]
Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/423/34105#34105