Licensed to be confusing, restrictive and obtuse

Licensed to be confusing, restrictive and obtuse

“Most of us never read software licences, but they are becoming more important – and absurd.”

“Eulas typically specify that the software’s publisher is not liable if anything goes wrong. They typically specify the publisher’s preferred jurisdiction for legal disputes. And some are even more restrictive: some graphics packages have been known to specify that they cannot be used in the production of pornographic images. Yet these licences are, as Hanlon complained, not really contracts: you generally cannot read them before you buy (rather than use) the software, and you can’t negotiate terms.”
An interesting article in the Guardian yesterday on software licensing. Read the full article here.