In the US? Depending on the district sued: absolutely. That shouldn't be the case, but it 100% is. Unless there is a rigid legal definition for "datacenter", l

In the US? Depending on the district sued: absolutely. That shouldn't be the case, but it 100% is. Unless there is a rigid legal definition for "datacenter", lawyers are allowed to argue that because the EULA specifically used the phrasing it does, that means nVidia has a definition that they have not made plain in the same document, which is grounds to void the clause. They are also allowed to argue that nVidia must produce a definition of "datacenter" which thanks to case law means that then becomes the official definition used in future court cases, something that nVidia would really not want to be responsible for. It's an amazing bit of "did you actually think this through?" when you actually look at the ramification of an EULA clause like this.