"Absolutely. I read it while my uncle `participated` on his own computer, with his own login. It just happened to pop up on his email while I was there. I did not partipate, I observed someone else participating.No breach there as `fair reporting` rules would apply."Seems to me reading the survey is participating. It did not use the words "fill out" the survey-it said participate.But hey-if you want to see if anything will happen to you-go for it-just not here unless Tom says otherwise.

The NDA doesn't apply unless it is accepted. Therefore section (i) is a nonsense. If you don't accept the NDA then you are free to disclose the existence of the survey - if you do accept it you can't! It is legitimate to disclose its existence.The part of (ii) that requires Microsoft to be given reasonable notice in the event of disclosure in judicial proceedings is also a nonsense. If a judge orders you to disclose something you disclose it - you don't tell him you have to give Microsoft notice, not unless you want to be in contempt of court.If Microsoft wanted to keep this quiet it shouldn't have published the survey on an open site. I have no association with Microsoft whatsoever, but I was still able to access the survey freely. Microsoft was being very silly if it thought it could keep this confidential.

Well I read it. So what is your point?

My point is i wouldn't want to be using a program with an Eula like that. Would you?

So far after completion no evidence of anything nasty. The details of the survey are

Thanks; nothing strange on this end either.

The NDA doesn't apply unless it is accepted. Therefore section (i) is a nonsense. If you don't accept the NDA then you are free to disclose the existence of the survey - if you do accept it you can't! It is legitimate to disclose its existence.The part of (ii) that requires Microsoft to be given reasonable notice in the event of disclosure in judicial proceedings is also a nonsense. If a judge orders you to disclose something you disclose it - you don't tell him you have to give Microsoft notice, not unless you want to be in contempt of court.If Microsoft wanted to keep this quiet it shouldn't have published the survey on an open site. I have no association with Microsoft whatsoever, but I was still able to access the survey freely. Microsoft was being very silly if it thought it could keep this confidential.

Rationalize anyway you want, there was an NDA. End of story. If you want to argue something like that, head on over to the "SKai" thread under the FS9 forum. :(

Rationalize anyway you want, there was an NDA. End of story. If you want to argue something like that, head on over to the "SKai" thread under the FS9 forum. :(

The NDA doesn't apply unless it's been accepted. Therefore Microsoft can't use it to keep the existence of the survey secret. Idf it wanted to do that it should have ensured that the NDA had been accepted by those it issued the survey to before it issued it.