I do not think that you can license to block valid research work. This is how Ford says you cannot check its emissions requirements. Such orders for goods / services, as a rule, are not legal, even if the conditions say that you agree to this. You may be sued for defamation or libel if there are flaws in your methods of experiment or scientific analysis.
It IS REALLY difficult to match company standards in such a way that you are not sued.
Here's an article about Oracle technology. http://www.iisocialcom.org/conference/passat2012/PASSATProceedings/data/4578b119.pdf
"I'm not interested in delving into boring licensed materials." Well, maybe you should be interested if you are afraid to get a lawsuit.
Here is the oracle license of July. A quick look, I see no limits. http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/license.112/e10594.pdf
If you do not indicate a specific technology up to the version or link to the license / terms of use, we can not specifically say.
Here's an interesting read about the stubs of politicians, but that's from 2007. http://genellebelmas.com/documents/Belmas-Larson-Clicking%20away.pdf
Noteworthy in conclusion: The First Amendment Jurisprudence provides significant support for the concept of the right to hear. Using the first amendment to attack gagwrap points would directly require the state action to be found first. However, even without government action, the First Amendment provides a significant basis for public policy, on the basis of which it can be declared impracticable. It remains to be seen how this Rationale for Public Policy will work with the revision of the contract framework when evaluating gagwrap reservations.
Flavorcape
source share