Intel, with the new Terms and Conditions would be skipping Spanish legislation

There is no doubt, the new Intel Terms and Conditions skip Royal Legislative Decree 1/2007, of November 16, which approves the revised text of the General Law for the Defense of Consumers and Users and other complementary laws .

After the publication in this same medium of the Intel Terms and Conditions update for its processors after launching a new microcode update that protects from Specter and Meltdown we wanted to do a quick field work. First and before publishing the first entry about it (this is the second) we have contacted Intel. The second action has been to review the Spanish legislation to see what it tells us and it can be interpreted that the Intel clause is abusive and the law is skipped.

Intel would be skipping the Spanish legislation with its new terms and conditions.

Intel's text is (or was if it hasn't been removed after the scandal): 'You will not allow or allow a third party to: (i) use, copy, distribute, sell or offer to sell the Software or associated documentation; (ii) modify, adapt, improve, disassemble, decompile, reverse engineer, change or create derivative works of the Software except and only to the extent specifically required by mandatory applicable laws or any applicable third party license terms accompanying the Software; (iii) use or make the Software available for the use or benefit of third parties, or (iv) use the Software in their products other than those that include the Intel hardware products, platform (s) or software identified in the software, or (v) publish or provide any benchmarking software reference or compare performance tests. '

Consumers have rights and among these we have the right to carry out the necessary tests to verify that the product is what we have acquired. This is regulated by the 'Royal Legislative Decree 1/2007, of November 16, approving the revised text of the General Law for the Defense of Consumers and Users and other complementary laws.'

Within this in 'Chapter II. Abusive clauses' we find 'Article 82. Concept of abusive clauses' and inside you can read the following:

1. Unfair terms will be considered all those stipulations not negotiated individually and all those practices not expressly consented to that, contrary to the requirements of good faith, cause, to the detriment of the consumer and user, a significant imbalance of the rights and obligations of the parties arising from the contract.
2. The fact that certain elements of a clause or that an isolated clause have been negotiated individually will not exclude the application of the rules on abusive clauses to the rest of the contract. The employer who affirms that a certain clause has been negotiated individually, will bear the burden of proof.
3. The abusive nature of a clause will be appreciated taking into account the nature of the goods or services that are the object of the contract and considering all the concurrent circumstances at the time of its conclusion, as well as all the other clauses of the contract or another on which it depends.
4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding paragraphs, in any case the clauses that, in accordance with the provisions of articles 85 to 90, both inclusive, are abusive:
   1. 1. bind the contract to the will of the employer,
      2. limit the rights of the consumer and user,
      3. determine the lack of reciprocity in the contract,
      4. impose disproportionate guarantees on the consumer and user or unduly impose the burden of proof,
      5. are disproportionate in relation to the perfection and execution of the contract, or
      6. contravene the rules on competition and applicable law.

This is the first article, the second chapter of said Royal Decree and it is a bit absurd to copy them all, since you can yy consult it yourself. The law is very clear and establishes that the Intel clause is clearly unfair and therefore completely invalidated.