1.) Not having been defined either in the dictionary of the language used, nor earlier in the agreement, I define ‘COMPUTING DEVICE’ (note: all caps) to be the device consisting of all my computer and my human body, brain and mind.
2.) In a similar fashion to (1) above, I declare that the ‘one copy’ (note: case insensitive) of Corel Painter 12 is necessarily the last one I have downloaded, with the author of this text having the final right to arbitrate on which copy is the last one I downloaded.
Taking these as definitions of undefined word combinations in the license agreement, I subsequently accepted.
Tthat was a long December. Rarely do I chuck my half-baked thinking straight onto my wordpress.com blog but on the odd occasion that the world is getting on top of me (usually by accident), I just need to unload somewhere. Feel free to read, free to ignore, or think what you like of the three previous posts… it’s where I go when pushed a little in the too far direction.
all legal instructions to ME (that is, Dr John…) are written in perfect Standard English and are in accord with the principles as set forth in the English Standard Version of The Bible and so far as interpretation does not conflict with this, in accord with the definitions of either the Oxford Dictionary of English or the Oxford Reference Dictionary (though NOT the OED itself as I do not have access to a copy.) Yours ever, John.
I consider myself to be my computer, and my hardware to be mere peripherals. What does this mean for the interpretation of EULA’s??
…context of a software licensing agreement. I assume without question that: 1) it is properly written; 2) all ambiguity is deliberate and hence any possible valid English interpretation is a correct one, amongst which I may choose my preferred interpretation; and 3) The part of the license agreement which is to be read carefully begins at the very beginning, with the first visible word of the document and proceeds, complete sentence by complete sentence until a grammatical or lexicographic error is found, at which point I stop reading and what I have read is what I have agreed to. If you wish to discuss further what exactly is agreed to, this must be done face to face in person.
A while ago, in contravention of facebook’s current policy (though I was too lazy to check every website’s policy on user accounts, and didn’t check facebook’s), I copied what I perceived others to be doing and created a second account in my own name for the purposes of segregating my friends from a troublesome troll with whom I wished to retain facebook contact, but did not wish him to be able to scrawl over the walls of my friends.
Later whilst battling insomnia, and in a fit of boredom, I created an account for my alter ego, Chalisque. Facebook has detected that this is not a real account, and prevented login, and when prompted with the ‘This is really my name’ box, I could not in conscious deliberate action click the box and take the game one step further. Thus there is an account which has written one status update, posted two photos, friended one person and there is no way I can find to tell facebook about this, come clean and get the account removed. Anyway, I’ve confessed here, publicly. I apologise to facebook for any inconvenience. For me that is the end of the matter unless facebook wishes to take it further.
All the best,
John (aka S. Chalisque, a name I’ve been using online since 2007)