I'm not a lawyer, but MS removal of MS fax but Outlook 98 is an act of negligence but a deliberate action which if done without consent could be an offence under the act.
It has certainly been suggest to me by our lawyers that we would have to be careful that our right to use any mechanism in our software to disable it's operation on breach of licence terms would have to be clearly established in the software licence if we wished to avoid the risk of prosecution under the act.
I should say that we do not have any current plans to use such mechanisms
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ewan Davis
AAH Meditel - Voice +44 (1) 527 579414 Fax +44(1)527 837287
Email [log in to unmask] also at [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Graham Ross [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 04 April 1998 14:47
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: FW: Windows 95 shareware??
Graham Ride wrote:
>
> At 08:41 03/04/1998 +0100, Ewan Davis wrote:
> >What about the Computer Misuse Act. My understanding is that damaging data
> on a system as a result of unauthorised access (which might include a
> program doing something that the person running had not be informed it would
> do) might be an offence under the act.
> >
> >Can we get Bill Gates in to the Scrubs ?
>
> A very interesting point Ewan, can we please have a G Ross interpretation on
> 'unauthorised access'?
Interesting thought, but doubt it. Would you believe it, I don't have a
copy of the Act with me, but I would expect it gives some detailed
description of what is "unauthorised access". There would need to be
some intent in the minds of Microsoft. The Act's target is hackers not
those whose negligent conduct causes damage to other programmes or
data.
Graham Ross
Solicitor
Ross & Co
Liverpool, UK
+44 (0)151 284 8585
+44 (0)151 236 6035-fax
ALeRT:-http://www.alertuk.com
Y2K-LAW:-http://www.y2kalert.com
|