How, then, could runn1ing have submitted this link? Let's look at the page containing the license agreement: http://www.stanford.edu/~laurik/.book2software/ . Let's assume that opening a page doesn't make you agree to any of its content, so you can read the agreement without being bound to it. Look at the source of that page. Beyond the boilerplate "you can't sue us for our software kicking your puppy; we get your firstborn child unless it's ugly", there's a <button> element. Its _onclick_ method? window.location='publishing_this_url_is_probited_by_the_license_you_accepted_getting_here_from_the_previous_page.html'
So simply append that url to the folder in the current page, and you get to the submitted link without ever accepting the terms in the agreement.
Besides, as polemic says, 4(a) says nothing about sharing the download url.
And also, there's no text on the download page that says that downloading any content indicates you accept the agreement, so you can even download the software without agreeing. The license agreement page does say "BY DOWNLOADING, INSTALLING, COPYING, ACCESSING, OR USING THE SOFTWARE, ... YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT."
So, arguably, if you read the agreement page, downloading the software on the download page indicates you agree to the terms. But if you've never seen that page, you haven't agreed to the terms.
Oh, and if it's not obvious, I'm not a lawyer. If you mistake any of this for legal advice, please let me know so I can laugh at you.
Nice try, but no. Courts are run by human beings, who apply their own judgement to the case at hand and take things like that into account. Intent is definitely part of what's considered for most crimes.
The legal system is weird, political, too-insular at times, and funny-looking from the outside and the inside, but it's a system that's evolved, in the case of Common Law, in parts from pre-Roman Germanic tribal customs. The system has been dealing with smartasses like you since before your ancestors had been deloused.
I used to do something similar with this early into the beta of my product by using LocalStorage. If someone went to the URL without first seeing the license, the page would be redirected back at the license. I see no reason why they can't just do that here.
...If you do want some self-referential URL tomfoolery: https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/223794554040623104
Did it involve basically predicting what the number was likely to be by observing the current posting rate, tweeting a bunch of times, and then stopping when one of the tweets matched? Or am I missing something?
> "shall not post, distribute, transfer, loan, lease, rent, license, market, sell, or otherwise provide the Software to any third party, and shall not copy, reverse compile, reverse engineer or disassemble the Software, the sole exception being that a copy of the Software may be made for back-up purposes;"
So how is sharing the download page URL prohibited by the agreement (4 ((a))?
I'm sure (:-s) the surge in traffic with an incorrect referrer will prompt them to modify the language in the agreement.