Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Click and Accept Software Licenses

Posted by michael on from the click-and-be-bound dept.

q2k sent in this tidbit about "click-wrap" software agreements - an analysis of a couple of court cases over such licenses. Good reading for anyone interested in the subject.

5 of 14 comments (clear)

  1. web based license agreement by bluelip · · Score: 4

    What about all of the licenses you have to agree to before you can download sample software. Most of them are just a text field that the web designer left editable. Would it be legally binding if I changed it to say that the company I'm downloading from agrees to pay me $45/hr for demoing their software?

    --

    Yep, I never spell check.
    More incorrect spellings can be found he
  2. Did you read the bottom of the web page? by plover · · Score: 5
    Before using this site, please read our terms of use. © 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 Hale and Dorr LLP

    (I checked the document source, but there were no IRONY tags around it.)

    How enforceable is that? Not only is it at the BOTTOM of the page (where you won't read it until you hit the end of the article in all Western languages), but you have to have done so BEFORE having read the page content?

    John

    --
    John
  3. Re:Why no front page? by GigsVT · · Score: 5
    In case you hadn't noticed, slashdot has gotten a lot crappier in the last year or so. It's not the editors, it's the readers, and the posters. Everytime I try to correct someone's incorrect info, I get three posts in reply with personal attacks.

    I submit stories of vital importance to online freedom, and instead some anime shit makes the front page.

    I've come to the conclusion, I'm going to start to read at +4 on main page stories, and not post unless it is really really important.

    It's dissapointing that Slashdot has become this. My karma slides down every time I moderate, because any idiot can metamoderate, and they usually do so badly.

    This whole thing is broken. By allowing negative moderation, creating karma, and arbitrary selection of stories, the creators of Slashdot messed up bad. Karma creates a competition, negative moderation allows for revenge in moderation, and arbitrary story selection means that important news will fall through the cracks.

    Whew...

    OK, that was worth the 2 karma I will lose when I am modded down. :)
    -

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  4. Why no front page? by agentZ · · Score: 4

    This is a good article with some actual good news. Why isn't it on the front page? Or has /. resorted to only reporting sensational news that stirs up the anger of nerds everywhere...

  5. This is pretty blatant... by mbessey · · Score: 4

    Read the article, but this is about whether AOL can enforce certain parts of its click and accept license in a specific case. In particular, their ability to require that cases be tried in Massachusetts.

    Here's what AOL did wrong with their agreement:

    1. The plaintiffs claim that AOL's software damaged their browsing environment before they even had a chance to read the agreement, much less agree to it.

    2. In order to actually read the agreement, you have to select "read the agreement" TWICE in two different screens where the default was "I Agree".

    3. Even if you did all that, and then clicked "I don't agree", the software didn't undo the changes it had made to your system.

    So, AOL wants to be able to enforce their agreement on people who haven't read it, and on people that chose not to accept it...