FC: Freshmeat author replies to Politech on Borland license

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

Below forwarded with permission. This is a response to my short essay:

"A defense of Borland's license saying auditors may inspect your PC"
http://www.politechbot.com/p-03029.html

---

From: "T.J. Duchene" <linuxman () worldwebcafe com>
To: declan () well com
Subject: Borland license
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 13:48:01 -0600

Hello Mr McCullagh:

I am the author of the Freshmeat article in question.   With your patient
indulgence, I would like to point out "what is wrong" with the license.

A friend sent me a copy of your comments concerning the license.  I agree,
your points are 100% perfectly valid.  It is our choice to accept the
license, or not.

I also admit I made a few mistakes on the finer points of law.  After all, I
am a programmer, not a lawyer.  I sent a corrected letter to Freshmeat, but
it hasn't been posted yet.

My concern stems from the fact that while software companies should have the
right to ask terms, they should not have the right to enter someone's home.
Granted again, when you agree, you are giving them that right.  A choice.

As we both know, working in the industry forces you to accept certain "de
facto" products. When working with the desktop, you are forced "de facto"
style to accept Windows for use by the common market.  As a hypothetical
example, if Windows were licensed under such a scheme, privacy would become a
major issue in our society.  Many people skip over license agreements.
Millions of users' personal infomation would be open to scrutiny without a
warrant.    I know very few people who would find that acceptable - since we
require it from our law wnforcement establishment.

Granted, software development as an industry is what is considered a niche
market from the general public.  Software development is a highly confidental
process.  With Borland entering systems on a whim, there is no guarantee that
intellectual, property, or patents rights will be protected from prying eyes.
 There is no way to ensure that Borland will not take advantage of the access
to initiate designs on a competative product.  The license doesn't name
specifics as to what will be accessed or how. Any sane manager isn't just
going to open up everything to them because they want to check one thing.


What I think - in my opinion - is that companies should not be allowed to
place those kind of clauses in their EULAs.  Companies zealously protect and
expand their rights - if one company is allowed to do it, others will
eventually follow suit.

To protect or at least inform others is a effort I find worthwhile, even at
the risk of sounding like I'm out on the fringe. The goal is public
discussion of these issues, so that everyone on both sides are honest and
open.


Warmest Regards,
T.J. Duchene

---

From: "T.J. Duchene" <linuxman () worldwebcafe com>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
Subject: Re: Borland license
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 01:30:27 -0600

P.S.

In case I forgot to mention it, the text of both the revised letter and the
original are available at my site http://www.kewlness.net.

Since I mentioned that I sent a corrected letter, I wanted to make sure you
had it at your disposal.

T.J.

---




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Events: Congreso Nacional de Periodismo Digital in Huesca, Spain from
Jan. 17-18 (http://www.congresoperiodismo.com) and the Second
International Conference on Web-Management in Diplomacy in Malta from
Feb. 1-3. (http://www.diplomacy.edu/Web/conference2/)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------