NY AG Sues Network Associates Over License Terms

An Anonymous Coward writes: "Excite is running an article about how New York is suing McAfee over what it considers a restriction of free speech because McAfee does not allow customers from publishing reviews without prior approval from McAfee. From the article: 'In one instance, Network Associates demanded a retraction of an unfavorable review published in the online and print magazine Network World, citing a clause on its Web site that prohibits product reviews without permission, the lawsuit alleged.'"

Comments

The goverment should regulate EULAs

[DavidJA]

In .au, the goverment regulates Lease Agreements for housing, home building contracts, home buying contacts, finance contracts all to protect the consumer and give them a minumum set of rights.

Why don't the goverment do the same thing with software EULAs?

Re:The goverment should regulate EULAs

[digitalunity]

Most EULA's contain clauses which state that your usage of their software indicates your agreement to the formentioned EULA. A EULA is a legally binding contract, and if you use a companies software, you 'get your hands tied'.

I think one thing we all need to focus on are unreasonable terms, such as Microsoft disallowing the usage of Open Source software on .net or the public criticism of a software company. We need what you describe, desperately. I'm not a *big goverment* kind of guy, but there are times when intervention is necessary. Has anyone actually read a Hotmail agreement recently? You'd think that'd be enough to scare off any avid Microsoft fan; but I guess not.

Re:The goverment should regulate EULAs

[Floyd Turbo]

No problem. My EULA says that by selling software to me, a company agrees to be bound by my EULA, which also provides that I'm not bound by anything in the company's EULA.

Re:The goverment should regulate EULAs

[mi]

NO! The government regulation is much worst than any company can do. You can always change the company. You can install FreeBSD and free yourself from Microsoft. You can switch to Symantec if you don't like McAffee. But changing government is a lot harder.

This case is a good example of the system working.

The government already regulates real estate leases in New York. And because of that the housing is notoriously expensive and of low quality. Do you want your milk-man to be obligated to sell you dairy? At the price set by the government? I come from the country, where this was the case, and as a result there was no milk in the stores.

I can go on and on, but I'll be modded up as a trolling flaimbait if I do. So I'll get back on topic. No government regulation, please. Thanks for your time.

Re:The goverment should regulate EULAs

[Sc00ter]

The biggest problem with this is that except for EULAs you usually get to see the contract before you agree to it. Most EULAs are inside the box and you can't see it until you open the box, and to top it off, most places won't accept returns on software that's been opened, so if you disagree with the EULA then you're out however much you paid for the software.

Re:The goverment should regulate EULAs

[WNight]

EULAs violate general contract law in many ways, that's why companies are trying to pass the UCITA, they know that without it their EULAs are worthless. They wouldn't waste time on a law that didn't help them.

By the time you see an EULA you already own the software. They withhold your right to use it until you "agree" but that's really extortion. They offer your the right to use the software, but it's not theirs to offer which means they're not offering you anything. There are other issues with it, these are just the two most obvious.

Remember, they're pushing for the UCITA because they need it.

You need my permission also

[LM741N]

I hereby declare that this comment cannot be moderated down without my express permission :)

Cigarettes next

[jmv]

"By buying this pack of cigarettes, you agree not to measure nicotine levels or any other compound. You also agree not no write unfavorable reviews or studies about cigarettes regarding possible diseases or addiction. In the event you become sick, you agree not to tell your doctor you are smoking cigarettes and you shall not accept any treatement for lung cancer or any other disease associated to smoking"

Wired article more detailed

[Robotech_Master]

Wired has a better article about this situation. It goes into more detail than the short blurb cited in this story.