What does a plane have to do with it? Iron Maiden have one, too.

Bzzzt. Wrong. It breaches contract law and your consumer rights and they take precedence. Even if you "agree" your rights are still in place as not even you can sign them away. The option to "shop elsewhere" is irrelevant.

As to your strikeouts, who cares? Those were unenforceable clauses in the first place and thus automatically null and void. If they get pissy about it the *entire contract* can be rendered null and void, meaning they would have to refund any and all monies already paid to them.

[Citation needed]

Not that I don't believe you but there's a lot of assholes on the net nowadays.

Given the amount of laws on the books you've probably broken three of them without knowing it just by making that post. But that's OK, apparently.

"Ignorance of the law is not an excuse" is an excuse in itself used to oppress as the assumption is made that you *did* know a certain action was illegal, did it anyway and feigned ignorance. In other words, you're a liar too. Just for that you can have another six months in chokey.

We're doing quite well in EU without software patents.

I see the last moments of my victims every time I close my eyes. Keeps me warm at night.

The 85% who thought it wasn't illegal to make a backup were correct as it isn't illegal to do so. However, it was a copyright infringement to do so. So you have something you are entitled to do that is also illegal. Since your consumer rights trump a civil misdemeanour (never tested, but your rights are inviolable) no one wanted the hassle of upholdng that law.

Seriously, cutting back on the hops and using wheat is just plain wrong, no Brit would call lager beer.

Then again a whole generation has had John Smiths Smooth at knockdown prices in university so when they don't know what real beer is. Bloody yuppie kids.

I'm more of a mead guy, myself.

Methinks GP is possibly a UK real ale drinker. However as this new brew is supposed to be a Dunkelweizen he may be pleasantly surprised. It all depends on how heavy they are with the gruit.

Not until they'd finished the scouring of the Shire it wasn't. The Party Tree had been felled and the Gaffer was in lock-up (though some privately thought that was the best place for him).

That used the "original" work which is public domain. There is no way this one will get made into a film.

If a contract contains a clause that abrogates inalienable rights then that clause can be deemed as unenforceable and should be removed in order that you have a fair contract fully agreed by both parties. If that part cannot be removed then the whole contract is null and void. This is basic contract law.

Of course this relies on the agreement of a EULA forming a valid contract in the first place due to there being no signatories, other identifying marks or even a verbal agreement noted on it. A click on a button is not any of those, yet somehow it *is* a legally binding contract when the company wants it to be but never is when the other party wants it to be. And they have an army of lawyers who will bankrupt you if you don't like it.

Huh. I responded in a similar way on reddit (to one of the developers, no less). Downvote frenzy ensues as I dared to compare the marvellous nothing-remotely-wrong-with-it PHP with born-of-the-faeces-of-Satan ASP...