scott wrote:
> If it means only the "no backup" clause is ineffective, then presumably 
> there is another clause that says "if any of the other clauses are 
> broken then the whole license is terminated", in which case you could 
> use it as normal, but if you made a backup you'd terminate the license 
> agreement and have to send the software back.

If the license is invalid, why would you have to send the software back? 
Then (in the USA) it just turns into a copyright question. I.e., the use 
and copying of the software is controlled by the laws that regulate what 
you do with any other purchase you make without an explicit license, 
like buying books or artwork or food or whatever.

If the license says you have to send it back, and the license is 
invalid, then you wouldn't have to send it back.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Remember the good old days, when we
     used to complain about cryptography
     being export-restricted?

Post a reply to this message