Re: Microsoft EULA never tested in court ..

[Matt]

Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> ____/ Doug Mentohl on Wednesday 11 March 2009 15:37 : \____
>
> > 'By using the software, you accept these terms .. You can recover from
> > Microsoft and its suppliers only direct damages up to the amount you
> > paid for the software'
> >
> > 'This limitation applies to .. claims for breach of contract, breach of
> > warranty, guarantee or condition, strict liability, negligence, or other
> > tort to the extent permitted by applicable law'
> >
> > 'The first user of the software may reassign the license to another
> > device one time'
> >
> > 'The first user of the software may make a one time transfer of the
> > software, and this agreement, directly to a third party'
> http://download.microsoft.com/documents/useterms/Windows%20Vista_Ultimate_English_36d0fe99-75e4-4875-8153-889cf5105718.pdf
>
> This might also be unconstitutional in the US. As for the UK:


Which part of the EULA might be against which part of the Constitution?