Weekly Edition
Return to the Announcements page
| |||||||||||||
The EFF guide to EULAs
The EFF has put out an advisory on
some of the worst terms often found in software end user license
agreements. "Many people treat EULAs with the same reverence they do
the tags on mattresses that say, 'Do not remove this tag under penalty of
law.' They scoff at the idea that anyone could enforce such a bizarre
rule. Increasingly, however, we are seeing consumers and software
developers threatened with lawsuits for engaging in the digital equivalent
of ripping tags off a mattress."
(Log in to post comments)
The EFF guide to EULAs Posted Feb 18, 2005 16:23 UTC (Fri) by southey (subscriber, #9466) [Link] Who is I in the "I Agree" button? It is the important definition that missing from this. Preinstalled software doesn't have it.
The EFF guide to EULAs Posted Feb 18, 2005 19:24 UTC (Fri) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] Also: What about software you install at work, or for a friend on their owncomputer?
The EFF guide to EULAs Posted Feb 20, 2005 5:54 UTC (Sun) by zblaxell (subscriber, #26385) [Link] My employer had a vendor's application engineers come by the other month(if you're seriously considering paying six figures for software, they'll not only send over a team of people to help you evaluate it, but they pay for lunch too ;-). We showed the vendor's guys to one of our computers we had set up for them, and they ran through all of the software installation...except that we were asked to step in each time to click on the "I Agree" buttons for each of the dozen or so separately licensed modules. So whoever "I" is, it's absolutely not the vendor or the vendor's technical or sales staff, not even if our people say "yes, we agree, just click the damn button so we can all go to lunch!" in front of a half-dozen witnesses on both sides of the client-vendor divide. I think they expect that if things end up in court, they'll be dusting the mouse for fingerprints or something. Normally an agreement binding on the corporation must be made by an officer of the company, but I don't see many executives following IT people around to kick on "I agree" buttons. It might be valid to review each EULA once, then delegate the actual agreement-clicking to IT for all future installs of the same software version...but I doubt that many IT people forward EULA texts to their superiors for review either. Incidentally, I tried a short quiz experiment...none of the vendor's own staff knows what's in their own EULA either.
Mattress Tag Posted Feb 18, 2005 17:46 UTC (Fri) by clugstj (subscriber, #4020) [Link] Actually, the mattress tags say "Not to be removed except by the consumer." So, this is a flawed analogy.
Mattress Tag Posted Feb 18, 2005 18:10 UTC (Fri) by acmay (guest, #27555) [Link] Well the analogy could be that no one really reads the EULA or mattress tags.
Or it could be that people "hear" something and then repeat it as truth rather than finding a mattress tag and reading it.
Maybe they did read the 'execpt by consumer" part, threw away the tag and just forgot what it said.
Mattress Tag Posted Feb 18, 2005 19:03 UTC (Fri) by dsime (guest, #5764) [Link]
They didn't used to have that "exception" it was added when the absurdity was widely known
Mattress Tag Posted Feb 18, 2005 20:29 UTC (Fri) by allesfresser (subscriber, #216) [Link] Thus the scene in "Peewee's Big Adventure" where Peewee meets the convict...:
"[Pee-Wee looks at Mickey's hand as he is wearing one handcuff]
The EFF guide to EULAs Posted Feb 18, 2005 21:50 UTC (Fri) by dps (subscriber, #5725) [Link] At least in the UK, some of those nasty EULA terms are unenforceable. Legal advice consistently stated that the "by openning this envelope" language is, or at least was, legally null and void. Whether click through has any more legal force is not something I am competent to say.
Anything that attempts to claim your consumer rights do not apply has no legal force whatsoever in almost all countries, and it does not matter how or when you try to do it. The EU has said reverse engineering for compatability purpsoses is also a right, so attempts to disallow it might not have any legal force.
I am not a lwayer but *did* attend a seminar about the law in this area (quite a while ago).
EULA extinction Posted Feb 18, 2005 23:47 UTC (Fri) by scripter (subscriber, #2654) [Link] I predict that in twenty years, EULAs will be extinct (unless you want to install old software). EULAs are incredibly counter-productive for consumers, and make the installation of software quite a burden. I believe that one day, we will look back at EULAs and wonder why we put up with them, and why companies jumped on to the EULA-me-too-bandwagon.
EULA extinction Posted Feb 19, 2005 13:56 UTC (Sat) by XERC (guest, #14626) [Link] Yes, ironically, I believe that the EULA-s will bepart of some sort of a law. Idea: everything is clearified, it's clear, that if You use product X, then You're hooked, and, as it's in the law, it's easy to fight You in the court. The text of the EULA will be auctioned to the highest bidder.
Fun lawyer tricks Posted Feb 21, 2005 11:01 UTC (Mon) by dark (subscriber, #8483) [Link] You could try this the next time you're about to install something draconian at work: instead of clicking on 'I Agree', copy the text of the EULA and send it to the company's legal department, and ask if it's ok to agree to this. Make sure you ask for an official opinion. For example, you could be in the process of documenting the procedure for installing this software, so you'd like to quote their answer.
Then watch the same people who wrote your employment contract and NDA try to swallow the terms of the EULA :-)
I haven't had the chance to try this myself yet. I guess that makes me lucky.
Fun lawyer tricks Posted Feb 21, 2005 17:22 UTC (Mon) by mdekkers (guest, #85) [Link] I did this once - when I was working for a Government. Apperantly, the EULA encroached on National Sovereinty or somesuch, and the Government instantly started looking at Open Source.
The EFF guide to EULAs Posted Feb 22, 2005 18:39 UTC (Tue) by NRArnot (subscriber, #3033) [Link] I know someone who has a 9-year-old to do his installs.
The user has then honestly never seen the EULA, the kid has but cannot ever be sued because of his age at the time he clicked "I agree".
IANAL but I suspect it's lawyer-proof even in the USA, at least until such time as they make it illegal for a minor to operate a computer. I would also hope, though not expect, that since the minor had no legal competence to agree to anything, any violation of one's legal rights by the installed software leaves its supplier seriously exposed to legal challenges!
The EFF guide to EULAs Posted Feb 22, 2005 22:12 UTC (Tue) by s_cargo (guest, #10473) [Link] but I suspect it's lawyer-proof even in the USAOf course it isn't "lawyer proof". Little different than having the 9 year old shoplift something for you.
The EFF guide to EULAs Posted Feb 24, 2005 11:42 UTC (Thu) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link] There's a big difference:
Shoplifting is generally illegal. Installing and using software you legally bougth and paid for is generally legal.
There's a difference between asking someone to do something anyone knows to be illegal and asking someone to do something any reasonable person would consider legal.
|
|||||||||||||