Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.ysu.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!bcarh189.bnr.ca!nrchh45.rich.nt.com!news.utdallas.edu!news.tamu.edu!root From: root@marsgrp.tamu.edu (root) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Why to not buy Matrox Millennium Date: 29 Mar 1996 08:46:13 GMT Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX Lines: 36 Message-ID: <slrn4ln943.2lp.root@marsgrp.tamu.edu> References: <4j21ph$crr@slappy.cs.utexas.edu> <4j3muv$34m@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> <VLADIMIR.96Mar24221733@Burner.dsg.stanford.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp08-01.rns.tamu.edu X-Newsreader: slrn (0.8.6.1) Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.apps:13966 comp.os.linux.development.system:20423 comp.os.linux.x:28220 comp.os.linux.hardware:35064 comp.os.linux.setup:48374 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:393 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:2915 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:2685 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:16409 On 25 Mar 1996 06:17:33 GMT, Vladimir Vukicevic <vladimir@Burner.dsg.stanford.edu> wrote: >In article <jameslDosqBp.E0C@netcom.com> jamesl@netcom.com (James Logajan) writes: > >> >> The bottom line is that nobody has asked for the bloody details of the >> innards of the Matrox board, only the interface protocol. And I'm pretty >> sure that is fair game to reverse-engineer. >> > >Exactly. Matrox doesn't seem to understand this. Incidentally, in my >'software license agreement' that came with their drivers: > >"The original purchaser may not engage in, nor permit third parties to >engage in, any of the following: > .. > - Attempting to unassemble, de-compile or reverse engineer the Software > in any way. > Is this stated in such a way that: The person that owns the software cannot avoid digesting this information 1) before it's purchased, 2) if he/she cannot read 3) if he/she cannot read in the language in which it is printed, 4) if the product was purchased by someone as a gift and the recipient never was in a position to agree, 5) if it was installed at purchase time as a package ? It seems to me that this is an unenforceable agreement if for no other reason than the end user may have never agreed to anything or known of such an agreement. It also is a civil matter. Bill Gates took the "let them sue me attitude" with stacker. For companies of this ilk, take the same attitude and for companies which actually serve the needs of the customer, never take advantage of them. semon@comp.tamu.edu