h a l f b a k e r yLoading tagline ....
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Sometimes computer owners purchase software out of necessity. The computer owner may not like or agree with the software manufacturer. In particular, the software manufacturer may be acting as the worst kind of monopoly. In other cases, the software manufacturer may attempt to apply countless unfair
contract terms to the software license.
Reading the license, entering your code and clicking accept is a subservient act to a company to which you certainly do not wish to be subservient. Them getting your money is quite bad enough.
As a law-abiding citizen, the only option is to go and get some legal crack.
Logging on to the legal crack website, you supply your purchase details to demonstrate that you have actually bought the software. You then download a crack to bypass licensing and activation for whatever software package. Use of this crack ensures you do not need to agree to any license terms.
There was nothing on the software packaging which indicated the need to agree to license terms or indicated that you could not use the Legal Crack. Therefore, you now have the software installed free of license terms. (If the license terms are only displayed during the supplied installer; then they must only apply when you use the supplied installer... otherwise they would be clearly explained at the point of sale)
Software which phones home is best under this system. Large numbers of reports of unlicensed software will infuriate the manufacturer. If they come and check, they will be further infuriated to discover that you have purchased the software.
In the case of bundled software, there will come a time when this kind of manipulative system will come under the fire of the legal system. A question will be asked in court "what percentage of the bundled license keys are activated?" and the answer will be low. The court will rule that as so many users are not activating the software, they clearly do not have need of the bundled software; and the practice will be ruled illegal.
Finally; legal crack could help with staff retention. Experienced computer programmers develop a distaste for certain companies and their products. They might quit your company in disgust if they discovered you were buying licenses from those companies. Legal Crack allows you to conceal the license purchase from your staff, enabling them to continue to believe that their employer is as much a raving liberal as they are.
Crack
http://www.inspect-...ageCrack121DJFs.jpg
[normzone, Jan 29 2008]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
This just seems like wishful thinking about a small detail of the legal framework within which software is used. Either the license is bogus, in which case you can crack and use your software because it's yours, period, regardless of the terms; or the license is valid, in which case no amount of talk will render your cracking legal. |
|
| |
How would the website verify your "purchase details" without collaboration from the original vendor, which, presumably, will be reluctant to help? |
|
| |
wow. you actually read one of those agreements... and were offended..... |
|
| |
Free Software is Teh Solution™ to the problem, not this overcomplicated idea. |
|
| |
<possible worm-can hazard>I'm not sure where raving liberality comes into this.</pwch> |
|
| |
I for one can remember the days when licensing agreements only came with freeware. I've read the licensing agreements on several purchased software items, and am invariably offended by them, albeit I am more offended by some than by others. |
|
| |
I agree that the free software manufactured by my buddy Teh, is indeed the answer... but until then, I'm glad to see that someone is thinking up a way to bite back against rampant corporate megalomaniacs. |
|
| |
//or the license is valid// - I don't see how a license which you are never told about and never see can be valid. |
|
| |
Just for clarification - the basis of this idea is to fight against the software manufacturer as much as you can - whilst still actually having purchased the software. |
|
| |
I see no point in this, I mean, they have your money anyway so you're not hurting them at all. |
|
| |
Nobody actually reads or enforces the EULA so you're not helping yourself either. |
|
| |
Also, I think that the DMCA makes it illegal to make cracks (and even more so to distribute them) anyway, regardless of what they're used for. |
|
| |
Also, for anything to be a sucessful business, money needs to change hands. Charging for this service would just make matters worse. |
|
| |
This sort of business would incriminate itself easily plus leave a clear paper trail to follow. |
|
| |
Wasn't there an idea for putting all the
Halfbakery moderators on crack last
year??.... I was hoping this might be a
follow up. |
|
| |
Sure... I'm sure that "Legal Crack" would get along great with Microsoft or any other large-scale coorporate operation. Furthermore, GO DOWNLOAD THE FREAKING CRACK AND DO IT YOURSELF IF IT'S NOT A VIOLATION OF THE "TERMS OF USE." Idiot. |
|
| |
vincevincevince - could you give an
example of the terms to which you
object, and/or cite any instance where
enforcement of these terms has caused
grief? |
|
| |
Surely, the gripe is that you only see the
terms when you've already bought the
product, yes? So, the simpler and fairer
solution is to make the terms viewable
(online or on a box's label) before you
buy. Then, it's up to you whether to
agree to the conditions imposed by the
people who wrote and sold the
software, or take your business
elsewhere. |
|
| |
Trying to fix the "see terms only after
purchase" problem by a software hack
is just creating one problem to fix
another. [-] |
|
| |
//vincevincevince - could you give an example of the terms to which you object, and/or cite any instance where enforcement of these terms has caused grief? // |
|
| |
Sure - let's start with Windows XP and the fact that having bought the software I later learn I can't move it between machines. |
|
| |
Well, OK, fair enough, I agree. But the
solution is a change in the law that
requires the terms and conditions to be
made available before the purchase is
made. |
|
| |
I agree with [the MB]. Just make the terms of use available prior to purchase. |
|
| |