Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 23:34:15 -0500, Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> 
>> On 06/21/09 22:32, John VanSickle wrote:
>>> That, and the rather safe conclusion that people who are willing to
>>> break laws about WMD are not likely to give a rat's about their iTunes
>>> EULA.
>> 	Well, more seriously, it may be about covering Apple's rear end 
> rather
>> than preventing the user from doing something.
> 
> Absolutely, but it's quite funny that the law requires Apple put such 
> verbiage in the EULA when it's pretty well known that those organisations 
> who would use the technology for nefarious purposes won't be deterred by 
> a bunch of legalese.

It's more sad than funny; not because it would be the reason for 
dragging Apple into court, but because it would be the *excuse* for 
dragging Apple into court.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message