> > >"Banning users" (not sure exactly what you mean by that) is one thing, > >but disabling an app that someone has already paid for? I don't think > >Microsoft or Oracle would do that. I think they'd be leaving > >themselves open to lawsuits. They can refuse to do any future business > >with anyone they want, but once a customer has purchased a product or > >service, they can't just renege on the contract. > > Microsoft, Oracle, AT&T, Verizon, etc. all do this. It's in there EULA and TOU contracts. When you accept that contract, you accept their administration of the product. They aren't reneging on a contract, they are enforcing it. That's why they can cut off your cable, DSL, phone, and computer game at a moments notice. Notice how root-kits got so much bad press then game publishers came out with tools such as "Steam" and "Origin"? Up front, in your face root kits. Read a EULA, you'll be amazed at what they can do to what you "own."
As far as John is concerned, if it's in his EULA or TOU and the users accepts it or uses the product, they have to accept the kill switch. Rendall is correct, "no one has a inherent right to the application." This is not a social contract, it is a business contract. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to android-discuss@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en.
