[newsimage]http://static.rankone.nl/images_posts/2012/09/7TE2hB.jpg[/newsimage]Microsoft will introduce new terms of service in October which have privacy and legal implications Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/microsofts-new-terms-raise-privacy-concerns-forbid-class-action-suits-63553/](http://www.myce.com/news/microsofts-new-terms-raise-privacy-concerns-forbid-class-action-suits-63553/) Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.
My comment is that only works if the courts go along with it .
All a court has to to is strike a term it considers illegal.
I’m not a lawyer but the basic concept for this is I receive no compensation for agreeing to this type term . Therfore it becomes invalid.
Getting a judge to go against a corporation like MS on this is another matter.
In the UK the ‘contract’ between the parties has to be ‘fair’. Unfair clauses have been ruled as such and non binding on the second party.
However until the ‘unfair’ clause is tested in a court case, it stands!
EULA’s can never overrule the law. People should realise that.
I’m surprised. If I led a company into monopoly status as courts determined, and had completed numerous and expensive restorative processes, the last thing I’d do is force a consumer-base to abdicate legal remedies that world courts traditionally grant.
Ballmer learned nothing under Gates?!! Apparently that suspicion is now quite deserved.
[QUOTE=ChristineBCW;2653463]Ballmer learned nothing under Gates?!! Apparently that suspicion is now quite deserved.[/QUOTE] Oh Ballmer learned a lot. He’s been there almost from the beginning. But he’s a different kind of guy than mr William H. Gates.