Google Glass will SELF-DESTRUCT if flogged on eBay

Worthless Small Print

Google's guidelines have been talked about a lot lately. Like where their webmasters guidelines are more stringent than the legal requirements. This is fine where applied to inclusion on their systems.

BUT

Their small print does not carry more weight than a country's laws, no matter what they command you to do It's your property, and If it requires access to Google wallet, and Google wallet is not a subscription based service, then you are free to do whatever you want with the item.

While they will deactivate the item, you will then just lodge a complaint with the small claims court (in the UK anyway) who will then give Google the choice of defending themselves. When they fail to file paperwork on time (obviously they don't want to risk actually going to court) the court will rule in your favor, at which point they will instruct Google to refund the cash it cost you.

Simple workaround.

For sale: Google Glass charger. $1500. Includes free pair of Google glasses as a gift*

(worked when I sold London 2012 tickets i didn't want that happened to have accompanying merchandise with them).

I'm waiting for the inevitable "Glasshole punched really hard in the face for ... being a glasshole" story.

Video conferencing?

What the hell are people video conferencing a Google Glass wearer going to see? An eyeball? It'll be like conferencing Sauron!

Equal footing please

Dear CWFDNE.

You can have my money, but if I don't like what you do with it, I can have it back.

So there.

That explains why they seem to be US limited for the moment - such a restriction would be illegal in most of the rest of the world.

This all sounds very familiar.

"resistance is futile"

How long before they are rooted ?

Once you can do that you can do what you want to it; doesn't matter what google try to do with it.

If you have rooted it (and it talks to non google servers) and google tries to disable it -then surely they are trying to damage your property and could be prosecuted.

Good luck to Google

For those of you who have purchased a Google Glass don't fret. The product transfer restrictions that Google is attempting to enforce violates the well-established "First Sale Doctrine" and are uninforceable under established U.S. patent, trademark and copyright law. Google has just invited a class suit which will likely cost them more damages than any profits they might make selling the product. My recommendation to Google is to fire your corporate ambulance chasers and hire some real attorneys who are familiar with U.S. intellectual property laws.

GMAIL

There was this type of hype when Google launched GMAIL, people were selling GMAIL invites on eBay in the same manner of hype. It's predictable.

I have to wonder if that's even legal!

You can't legally limit what people do with their own private property. (within the bounds of law... obviously)

Apple

I'll wait for the Apple version thanks.

They won't be as authoritarian or draconian as...... Oh wait.....!

Who gives a shit ...

... about something one isn't going to spend money on anyway.

This draconian requirement by Google may just be for the test version of the glasses as I don't see this continuing once the official consumer version is released. I look at it as a way for Google to shore up the distribution of the developer version to prevent consumers from obtaining them. This isn't all that bad of an idea because developer versions tend to be unstable and Google doesn't want to provide much support to the device when in the hands of someone who has no patience or knowledge of how to troubleshoot. I would do the same thing but again for the consumer version that would change.

In all honesty though I wouldn't want this as I already have a cell phone but I would love a pair of glasses that can connect and project my home screen to my eye. The idea would be similar to plugging your phone into an HDTV only wirelessly and in real-time. I would like to keep my phone in my pocket and make all commands from my glasses. The reason for syncing is because I may not always want to use my glasses whenever I want to make a phone call or play a game or other things.

Yet again, that's why we need free software

It's a logical consequence of what happens if you don't have free software. Android may be open source, but it's just to hard to get your own image onto a device to really make it free.

As long as we don't recognize our natural right for free (as in speech) software and hardware, companies will continue to bully us around just like Google does in this example.

It's even more extreme when you look at the device itself. Those are machines that can see and hear everything you do. They can collect data on everything you do, and they have to in order to provide useful service to you.

The German constitutional court recently has derived a new right for the "integrity of data processing systems" in wake of the use of trojans to spy on people. They rightfully concluded that if they would allow them now, it would be possible to buy future devices like hearing aids or implants.

We need actually free software now for those devices, not just some open source code lying around on some server. People must be able to change the code and service any way they want or choose between a number of different versions provided by different people. If we don't do that now we will end up in a dystopian future.

Why "sell" in the first place

Just make it a indefinite rental period, and all those lovely restrictions become enforceable.

Though I bet even with the restrictions on selling in place, someone will try and sell one, and someone will buy it - if the price is right.

Self-destructing video glasses?

Good morning, Ethan!