Egzekwowanie EULA
April 29th, 2008, Tomasz RychlickiSelling botnets for particular attacks, black markets for stolen identities, and malware construction kits are all now par for the course for the increasingly commercial malware industry. Discovering that malware authors have actually turned to End-User License Agreements (EULAs) in an attempt to protect their own intellectual property, however, most definitely qualifies as something new, different, and beautifully ironic.
Szczegół w artykule na stronie www.arstechnica.com.
Co z egzekwowaniem takiej “umowy” przed amerykańskim sądem? Oczywiście tego typu kontrakt zostałby uznany za nieważny. Potwierdza to wyrok w sprawie Weisbren v. Peppercorn Prods., Inc., 41 Cal. App. 4th 246, 262, 48 Cal. Rptr. 2d 437, 447 (1995), gdzie z kolei cytowany jest wyrok w sprawie Lewis & Queen v. N.M. Ball Sons, 48 Cal. 2d 141, 150, 308 P.2d 713, 719 (1957).
The courts generally will not enforce an illegal bargain or lend their assistance to a party who seeks compensation for an illegal act. The reason for this refusal is not that the courts are unaware of possible injustice between the parties, and that the defendant may be left in possession of some benefit he should in good conscience turn over to the plaintiff, but that this consideration is outweighed by the importance of deterring illegal conduct. Knowing that they will receive no help from the courts and must trust completely to each other’s good faith, the parties are less likely to enter an illegal arrangement in the first place.