Re: DO READ Quickie Privacy Analysis of Google's New "Chrome" Web Browser

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Peter Moody" <peter.moody () gmail com>
Date: September 3, 2008 5:19:32 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Re: DO READ Quickie Privacy Analysis of Google's New  
"Chrome" Web Browser

It should be noted that the inclusion of this in the EULA was an
error. As has been noted by others, it's in the process of being
fixed.

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-chrome-license-agreement/
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080903-google-on-chrome-eula-controversy-our-bad-well-change-it.html

indeed, when I look at section 11 of the eula right now, it says:

11. Content license from you

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in
Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.

full-disclosure: I still work for google, but not on chrome or the
legal team or any team that had anything to do with this eula.

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 1:59 PM, David Farber <dave () farber net> wrote:
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Adam Fields <ip20398470293845 () aquick org>
> Date: September 3, 2008 4:17:29 PM EDT
> To: David Farber <dave () farber net>
> Cc: ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
> Subject: Re: [IP] Re:   Quickie Privacy Analysis of Google's New  
> "Chrome"
> Web Browser
>
> For IP, if you wish:
>
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 11:32:37AM -0400, David Farber wrote:
> [...]
> > What about the EULA: <http://www.google.com/chrome/eula.html>?  (Some
> > parts appended below.)
>
> [...]
>
> By the way - I don't think anyone else has mentioned that the EULA not
> only applies to content you _submit_ with it, but also to content you
> _view_ with it.
>
> 'In short, when you view a web page with Chrome, you affirm to Google
> that you have the right to grant Google an irrevocable license to use
> it to "display, distribute and promote the Services", including making
> such content available to others. If you don't have that legal
> authority over every web page you've visited, you've just fraudulently
> granted that license to Google and may yourself be liable to the
> actual copyright owner. (If you do, of course, you've just granted
> them that license for real.) I'm not a lawyer, but I suspect that
> Google has either committed mass inducement to fraud or the entire
> EULA (which lacks a severability clause) is impossible to obey and
> therefore void.'
>
> http://www.aquick.org/blog/2008/09/03/the-google-chrome-terms-of-service-are-hilarious/
>
> --
>                               - Adam
>
> ** Expert Technical Project and Business Management
> **** System Performance Analysis and Architecture
> ****** [ http://www.adamfields.com ]
>
> [ http://www.morningside-analytics.com ] .. Latest Venture
> [ http://www.confabb.com ] ................ Founder
> [ http://www.aquick.org/blog ] ............ Blog
> [ http://www.adamfields.com/resume.html ].. Experience
> [ http://www.flickr.com/photos/fields ] ... Photos
> [ http://www.aquicki.com/wiki ].............Wiki
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com