Slashdot Mirror
Selling Your (MMORPG) Soul
Gnpatton writes: "Here is an article about the recent ruling in the Blacksnow/Mythic case. It talks about the EULA (End User Licence Agreement, that thing that you never read) and about how this case might affect the rest of the software industry, not just with game companies. From now on, you might just want to read the EULA before you click 'accept'."
just logins and passwords your password is your own property
An EULA held up in court, despite the fact that no one ever signed anything, and there were no witnesses... this sounds like a really bad ruling. My guess is that it will be appealed, and eventually struck down. Either way, I think this case is going to be big...
Of course, this doesn't apply to all pre-installed software. A number of programs that come now require you to agree to an EULA before you are allowed to use the program, but what about Windows or any software that is pre-installed that doesn't require you to do so? If the user never clicked 'Accept', can he/she still be bound to the EULA as if he/she had clicked it, merely by using the software?
Hasn't there been a recent article about programs making you get rid of other programs such as Ad-Aware before being able to use them by hiding a clause in the EULA? That didn't really get through to me, but this time it will.
Doesn't everyone read the EULAs?
The "you can't do xyz" stuff you can ignore, as you haven't signed anything.
The "this software will do such and such which you might not have expected" is informative, and people should publicize these facts.
I'm not sure how that article made it to Slashdot. That was one helluva weak article. It might have helped if it had some information other than 'bevaaare!'
Just because the Judge ruled that they do, in fact own all the 'virtual property' in the world (and why shouldn't they? its all just bits on the harddrive in their server) doesn't really say anything about the general applicability of EULAs. The time to start worrying is when some ridiculous clause of a EULA (Microsoft..Most P2P software) is broken and enforced, not when something that seems pretty much like common sense is enforced (regardless of whether it was mentioned in the EULA....)
what if i don't agree and want my money back? do you think i could go up to best buy and say "hey man bought this game becasue it looked cool, but I don't agree to the EULA so can i have money back?" i'd be laughed out of the store. i say if a software co. want us to abid by their EULAS then they must print their EULAs in easy to read (for those that have poor eyesight) printing on the outside of the box, and we must agree to the EULA before we purchase software. OR they need to force stores that do not accept open software returns to start taking returns. Either way the software co. loses, either giveup precious advertising space on their software package, or try and do battle with the stores that pimp their software out.
Image if you were buying a bed and you were asked to sign an agreement first.
Or rather, imagine if a tag on the underside of the bed read "You agree to the agreement on our website just by laying on this bed." And courts upheld it because of some obscure twist of logic (the way they say making a copy of the software you bought in RAM is a copyright violation).
As for this ruling, well, is it for the SERVICE or for the SOFTWARE. If it's for the service, the position isn't as clear, because you didn't buy anything, you agreed that if you do such-and-such, the service will be provided to you, and if you don't do such-and-such, it won't.
But if the EULA on the purchased SOFTWARE was found to be binding, we're in DEEP SHIT TROUBLE, you better believe it.
Software End-User: Ha ha! I found a way to use the software in a way that Microsoft doesn't want, but still meets the terms of the EULA!
Microsoft HQ: Ieee! They found a loophole in our EULA! Quick! Mutate the EULA terms every 15 seconds! On my mark... go!!
End-User: Ahhhhhhrg!! They're mutating EULA frequencies! I can't keep up with the changes! I might be violating them and I won't know! *KNOCK KNOCK* Uh oh, it's THE KNOCK! The cops are here! *dragged away at gunpoint*
Microsoft HQ: Whew, that was close! Reduce EULA rotation frequency to the usual once per day.
What a weak article. I don't know this site, but it seems to me as if it is targeted to younglings discovering life. It belongs to the 12-years old crowd, not Slashdot.
A comic to make you think.
--Metrollica
is it still possible to return and get a refund for
the win coming with my computer form the store?
if not ads metioned a few times earlier in this forum.
i havent agreed to anything at it has been forced upon me.
@
Why is it that you have to purchase the software to read the EULA. What if you don't agree with it and refuse to use it at that point out of spite. You've already opened the package and can't get your money back usually. I just don't get it, never have.
What is written in some EULA's may surprise the unwary. Microsoft Windows products, for instance, contain a provision that the purchaser of these products does not actually own the software. They are merely renting the software and are restricted in how they may copy it.
Demands on respect for copyright come as a surprise to people?
Who are these people?
I have been pwned because my
So does this have any implications for the GPL? Does that mean it is or isn't enforceable now? After all, when MS steals l33t uber hax0r LNUX code in order to emulate LNUX's amazinf finacials...
Oh, never mind.
Unlike other EULA's, MMORPGs repeat their EULA's every time a user connects to play the game. In Dark Age of Camelot, the EULA pops up when you log in, and to continue, you have to accept the EULA.
Typically, anyone playing MMORPGs sees the EULA enough and is given the chance to NOT play the game if they disagree with the terms.
Contrast this with the typical software package that makes you agree to the EULA without actually seeing it in most cases, and even before you install the software on your computer.
Everquest has similar provisions (as will Neverwinter Nights, I would assume).
Here is the important passage from DAoC:
* You acknowledge and agree that all characters created, and items acquired and developed as a result of game play are part of the Software and Game and are the sole property of Mythic. You acknowledge that: (i) the Software and the Service permit access to Content that is protected by copyrights, trademarks, and other proprietary rights owned by Mythic as covered in Section 3 below.
Vincent J. Murphy
Spandex Justice
Buy the app yourself, but get your kid to install it for you. It's a double whammy on the company, since you yourself didn't "agree" to the EULA, you're not bound by it, and your kid can't be bound, since contracts with minors are non binding.
JBuilder has it in their EULA that by using their software, you waive your right to a trial jury in case you file any suits against them. Basically, the purpose of these EULA's are to rid the companies of as much liability as possible and still have control over their software as they see fit. Personally, I don't blame them, and as long as people continue to agree to them and just whine about it (as opposed to doing something), it'll continue. Eventually, I'm sure restrictions will be made, but not until something that REALLY screws up PR between the public and someone like, say, Microsoft, happens. So, anyway, just read your EULA's once in awhile. It's almost funny how much crap you're actually agreeing to just to use a little bit of software.
Danish != nationality
Heh. Cute, Timothy.
Especially considering the shit the Slashdot crew pulled when "Fascdot Killed My Pr" sold his account. And that was with no EULA at all to support you. You just screwed with him.
At least with a EULA we know our rights.
Dragging people kicking and screaming into reality since 1996.
On the other hand, the GPL gives you something (the right to copy, change, etc.) in exchange for something (play by their rules)... so even if it comes in a box you purchased you're still being given something.
Although, if you decide you won't use any of the additional rights the GPL grants, are you still bound by it if you, say, bought a RedHat package full of GNU so ftware? You're paying to use it, right?
The above is a synopsis of an excellent discussion in Brown Eye Journal... be forewarned, it's a p ainful read.
A few points about this decision bear repeating.
First, the jurisdiction of the court: the case was decided by a federal district court, a trial judge within the federal system. The Northern District of California, where the case was decided, is well respected for its expertise in matters of technology, having been the site of several important IP lawsuits and serving currently as the home to Silicon Valley. That said, the decision is binding authority only in the Northern District of California (although courts in other parts of the country may find it persuasive), and it has not been tested on appeal.
Second, the implications of the decision: the court did not decide the validity of a generally applicable statute or a regulation; it only ruled that in the facts of this case, the EULA was not procedurally deficient (for failing to give the user notice of its terms, for example) and was not substantively unreasonable (for imposing any terms that were fundamentally unfair, for example). The courts decide thousands of cases interpreting contracts each year, and they often do so by analogy to precedent. Accordingly, this decision might have no immediate impact upon the way you use software or review an EULA, but so long as this issue recurs, other judges likely will use the opinion in this case as the standard that they accept or from which they find reason to depart.
Third, the mutability of the decision: contract law is mostly state law, and most judicial decisions about the law of contracts may be overturned by the legislature. In the fields of, for example, sales, financing, and construction law, there have been enough disputes across many jurisdictions that most states have found it beneficial to enact a uniform law governing the rights of contracting parties. (The Uniform Commercial Code is the best known example of this.) Should this be a sufficiently momentous decision -- I don't think it is -- or become a sufficiently important issue -- and maybe it will -- then one can count upon the legislatures and the law professors to get involved.
Since I keep quoting from it, figured I'd post the dang thing. Always good to read what you are discussing. ;)
USER AGREEMENT AND SOFTWARE LICENSE
THIS END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT ("EULA") DESCRIBES THE TERMS BY WHICH MYTHIC ENTERTAINMENT, INC. ("MYTHIC") OFFERS YOU ACCESS TO AN ACCOUNT (THE "ACCOUNT") TO PLAY THE DARK AGE OF CAMELOT(tm) ONLINE ROLE PLAYING GAME (THE "GAME"). BY PRESSING THE "I ACCEPT" BUTTON, YOU ACCEPT THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS BELOW. BY PRESSING THE "DECLINE" BUTTON, YOU DECLINE OUR OFFER, IN WHICH CASE YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR RETAILER REGARDING ITS RETURN POLICY FOR THE DARK AGE OF CAMELOT(tm) CD-ROM. In the event you choose not to accept the EULA or by technical means can bypass/disable the "I ACCEPT BUTTON" by installing, copying, downloading, accessing or otherwise using the GAME, you agree to be bound by the terms of this EULA. You choose to accept this EULA every time you enter or re-enter the GAME. If you do not agree to the terms of this EULA, do not install or use the GAME; you may, however, return it to your place of purchase for a refund consistent with your retailer's policy on returned software. If you have any questions regarding these terms and conditions, please contact customer service at support@mythicentertainment.com.
A COPY OF THIS EULA CAN BE FOUND ON THIS DISK UNDER THE DOCUMENTS NAME "DARK AGE OF CAMELOT(tm) USER AGREEMENT.TXT" SHOULD YOU WISH TO CONSULT IT IN THE FUTURE.
1. GRANT OF LICENSE
* This EULA permits you to use one copy of the specified version of the GAME on any single computer or game platform. You may also store or install a copy of the GAME on a storage device, such as a network server, used only to install or run the GAME on your other computers over an internal network; however, you must acquire and dedicate a license for each separate computer on or from which the GAME is installed, used, accessed, displayed or run. A license for the GAME may not be shared or used concurrently on different computers.
* To play the Game, you must (a) purchase the Dark Age of Camelot(tm) game CD-ROM (the "CD-ROM"), which includes software required for the Game (the "Software"), (b) have a fully paid Account, and (c) have an Internet connection (which we do not provide) to access your Account. In addition to any fees described herein, you are responsible for paying all applicable taxes (including those we are not required to collect) and for all hardware, software, service and other costs you incur to access your Account. Neither this Agreement nor your Account entitles you to any subsequent releases of the Software, nor to any expansion packs or similar ancillary products. You understand that we may update or otherwise enhance the Software at any time and in doing so incur no obligation to furnish such updates to you pursuant to this Agreement.
* Subject to the terms of this Agreement, we hereby grant to you a non-exclusive license to use the Software solely in connection with playing the Game via an authorized and fully-paid Account. You may not copy (except to make one necessary back-up copy), distribute, rent, lease, loan, modify or create derivative works, adapt, translate, perform, display, sublicense or transfer the Software. You may not copy any of the written materials accompanying the CD-ROM. You may not reverse engineer, disassemble or decompile or otherwise reverse engineer or attempt to reverse engineer or derive source code from, all or any portion of the Software or anything incorporated therein or permit any third party to do so except to the extent that this restriction is expressly prohibited by applicable law. The Software may contain license management software that restricts your use of the Software. If the Software is an update, any transfer must include the update and all prior revisions.
2. Other Rights and Limitations
* This EULA does not grant you any rights in connection with any trademarks or service marks of Mythic.
We may amend this Agreement at any time in our sole discretion. Amendments shall be communicated to you either a) at the time you log into your Account; b) through a conspicuous post on our website. Such amendments shall be effective upon entering or re-entering the Game. If any such revision of this Agreement is unacceptable to you, you my terminate your membership as per Section 13.
* We and our suppliers shall retain ownership of all intellectual property rights relating to or residing in the CD-ROM, the Software and the Game. The Software is a commercial item.
* You acknowledge and agree that all characters created, and items acquired and developed as a result of game play are part of the Software and Game and are the sole property of Mythic. You acknowledge that: (i) the Software and the Service permit access to Content that is protected by copyrights, trademarks, and other proprietary rights owned by Mythic as covered in Section 3 below.
* You acknowledge that: (i) the Software and the Service contain graphics, sound effects, music, animation-style video and text (collectively, "Content"), and (ii) Content may be provided under license by independent content providers, including text contributions from other Members. These independent content providers, including other Members, are referred to in this Agreement as "Content Providers". You, and any user of your Account, must evaluate, and bear the risk associated with, the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any Content. Mythic does not pre-screen Content as a matter of policy, but Mythic has the right, but not the responsibility, to remove Content at any time which it deems to be harmful, offensive, or otherwise in violation of this Agreement.
3. Copyright
This Game is owned by Mythic Entertainment and is protected by the United States copyright laws and international treaty provisions. Mythic retains all rights not expressly granted. Therefore, you must treat the Game like any other copyrighted material (for example, a movie or book) except that you may make either (a) make one copy of the Game solely for backup or archival purposes, or (b) transfer the Game to a single hard disk provided you keep the original solely for backup or archival purposes. You may not copy the written materials accompanying the Game in whole or in part without the express written permission of Mythic.
4. Account Information
* Accounts are available only to adults or, in their discretion, their minor child. If you are a minor, your parent(s) or guardian(s) must complete the registration process, in which case they will take full responsibility for all obligations under this Agreement.
*
* BY CLICKING THE "I ACCEPT" BUTTON AND PROVIDIN US WITH A CREDIT CARD NUMBER, YOU REPRESENT THAT YOU ARE AN ADULT AND ARE EITHER ACCEPTING THIS AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF YOURSELF OR YOUR CHILD. You may not transfer or share your Account with anyone, except that if you are a parent or guardian, you may permit one child to use the Account instead of you (in which case you may not use that Account). You are liable for all activities conducted through the Account, and parents or guardians are liable for the activities of their child. Corporations and other entities are not eligible to procure Accounts.
* Upon registration, you must select a password. You are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of your password and are responsible for any damage, harm, lost or deleted characters, etc. resulting from your disclosure or allowing the disclosure of any password or from use by any person of your password to gain access to your Account.
* You may not disclose your password to any third party. We never ask you for your password by telephone or email, and you should not disclose it this way if someone asks you to do so. There may be an additional charge to reissue lost passwords. Although we may offer a feature that allows you to "save" or "remember" your password on your hard drive, please note that third parties may be able to access your computer and thus your Account.
* To obtain an Account, you will be required to choose both a login name and a player name. While you are encouraged to use a pseudonym, especially if you are a minor, you may not pick a name that violates anyone's trademarks, publicity rights or other proprietary rights. Acceptance of a pseudonym by the gaming system does not constitute a finding by Mythic that your chosen pseudonym does not violate any third party's trademarks, publicity rights or other proprietary rights, and you as the user are responsible for any liability in the choosing of a pseudonym. Mythic retains the right to reject any pseudonym it concludes, in its sole discretion, is indecent, obscene, or otherwise violates standards of good taste.
* As part of your Account, you can upload content to our servers in various forms, such as in the selections you make for the Game and in chat rooms and similar user-to-user areas (collectively, your "Content"). Your Content shall not: (a) infringe any third party intellectual property, other proprietary or publicity/privacy rights; (b) violate any law or regulation; (c) be defamatory, obscene, child pornographic or harmful to minors; or (d) contain any viruses, trojan horses, worms, time bombs, cancelbots or other computer programming routines that are intended to damage, detrimentally interfere with, surreptitiously intercept or expropriate any system, data or personal information. We may take any action with respect to your Content if we believe it may create liability for us or may cause us to lose (in whole or in part) the services of our ISPs or other suppliers. You hereby grant to us a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicenseable (through multiple tiers) right to exercise all intellectual property rights, in any media now known or not currently known, associated with your Content.
5. Fees
* We describe our fees and billing procedures at support.darkageofcamelot.com, which you must read prior to opening an account on-line. Those procedures are incorporated by reference. All fees are stated in U.S. Dollars. All fees are prepaid and non-refundable. Upon your acceptance of these terms, we will automatically charge your credit card the Account fee plus any applicable taxes we are required to collect, and you authorize us to do so. Thereafter, on the applicable anniversary, we will charge your credit card the then-current renewal rate plus any applicable taxes we are required to collect, and you authorize us to do so. If we are unable to process your credit card at a renewal period, your Account may be immediately terminated.
* Mythic may change its fees and billing methods at any time effective thirty days after notice of these changes are given through (a) the patching system (described below) or (b) our Web Site. You are responsible for reviewing the billing section of the Web Site to obtain timely notice of such changes. If any such change is unacceptable to you, you may terminate your membership as per Section 9. Your continued use of the Game thirty days after the first of (a) or (b) above, constitutes acceptance of the change.
6. Changes, Updates to the Game
Mythic may occasionally find it necessary to make changes to, or reset or change certain parameters of the Game in order to bring it back into balance or to correct any design errors, flaws or issues within the Game. These changes or resets may affect characters under your control and may cause you setbacks within the game world. In no event will any of these changes obligate Mythic to make any adjustments, refunds, reimbursements, etc. to either the Player's Account or to any or all of the Player's Characters within the game.
7. Patching the Game
For the purposes of updating/patching or otherwise modifying the Game, you hereby grant Mythic permission to (a) the extraction of hardware system profile data; (b) upload information from the Game's file directory; (c) download Game files to your computer and any data related to operation of the Game from any computer that logs on to the Service using your Account.
8. Hacks, Modifications and/or Changes to the Game
You may not use any third party software to modify the Game to change Game play. You may not use our intellectual property rights contained in the Game or the Software to create or provide any other means through which the Game may be played by others, as through server emulators. You may not take any action which imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on our infrastructure.
9. Selling of Items
You may not sell or auction any Game characters, items, coin or copyrighted material.
The selling of items, coins or any copyrighted part of the Game's player character whether through online auctions (for example Ebay), newsgroup or postings on message board is in violation of this EULA as well as Mythic's Player Code of Conduct. In addition to violating our agreement, selling items and/or coin violates our legal rights and may constitute misappropriation, and/or tortuous interference with our business and tarnishes the goodwill in the Dark Age of Camelot(tm) name.
10. Privacy.
You understand that you have no expectation of privacy regarding the communications you make in the Game or in Chat Rooms, and that Mythic representatives may monitor all communications made by or received from you. You understand that you should never provide any private information to any other player in the Game, and will not hold Mythic responsible for the consequences of any such disclosure by you. Further, you understand that in playing the Game, you may encounter and converse with people who are rude, offensive, belligerent, and who may use indecent, obscene, and/or threatening or harassing language. You are free to report any instances of such behavior to Mythic, and we will take such measures as Mythic, in its sole business judgement, determines are reasonable when such behavior violates either the EULA or the Player's Code of Conduct. HOWEVER, MYTHIC DOES NOT WARRANT THAT YOU WILL BE FREE FROM THE BEHAVIOR OF OTHERS YOU MAY DEEM INSULTING, DEMEANING, OFFENSIVE, THREATENING OR HARASSING WHILE YOU PLAY THIS GAME. IN THE EVENT THAT MYTHIC CHOOSES NOT TO TAKE ANY ACTION, TAKES AN ACTION WITH WHICH YOU DO NOT AGREE OR IS UNABLE TO TAKE ANY ACTION FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER, IN NO EVENT SHALL WE, OUR PARENT, OUR AFFILIATES OR OUR SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO YOU OR TO ANY THIRD PARTY FOR ANY INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (HOWEVER ARISING, INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE) AND/OR EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR ACCOUNT, OUR GAME OR YOUR TIME SPENT PLAYING THE GAME. OUR LIABILITY TO YOU OR ANY THIRD PARTIES IS LIMITED TO $100.
11. Parental Guidance.
The Game has been given a "TEEN" rating, which means that parents may find it inappropriate for use by persons under the age of 13. While Mythic may choose to monitor and take action upon inappropriate gameplay, chat or links to the Game, it is possible that at any time there may be language or other material accessible on or through the Service that may be inappropriate for children or offensive to some users of any age. While Mythic has established Rules of Conduct for players accessing the Service, Mythic cannot ensure that other players will not provide Content or access to Content that parents or guardians may find inappropriate or that any user may find objectionable. Mythic does not as a matter of policy pre-screen the content of the materials or communications transmitted by each player. Mythic will abide by the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act ("COPPA"), in that it will not collect any information about children beyond that necessary to establish and account and log into the game, which you as a parent agree to as part of this EULA, and Mythic will not disseminate any such information to any third party unless compelled pursuant to paragraph 12 below.
12. Disclosure of Information
We cannot ensure that your communications within the game and other personally identifiable information will not be disclosed to third parties. For example, we may be forced to disclose information to the government or third parties under certain circumstances, or third parties may unlawfully intercept or access transmissions or private communications. Additionally, we can (and you authorize us to) disclose any information about you to private entities, law enforcement or other government officials as we, in our sole discretion, believe necessary or appropriate to investigate or resolve possible problems or inquiries. Furthermore, if you request any technical support, you consent to our remote accessing and review of the computer you load the Software onto for purposes of support and debugging. You agree that we may communicate with you via email and any similar technology for any purpose relating to the Game, the Software and any services or software which may in the future be provided by us or on our behalf. You may choose to visit our web site at www.mythicentertainment.com if the site offers services such as a Game theme chat room or other services of interest to you. You are subject to the terms and conditions, privacy customs and policies of Mythic while participating in any interactions on the site.
13. Termination
* Either you or Mythic may terminate your Account, for any reason, without further obligation to the other. Further, Mythic reserves the right to terminate the Game at any time without further obligation to you.
* As way of example, Mythic may terminate this Agreement (including your Software license and your Account) immediately and/or terminate or temporarily suspend your access to the Game, without notice if Mythic believes, in its sole discretion, that your conduct (including but not limited to gameplay, chat or any other player activity) is unacceptable and/or inappropriate or for conduct which Mythic believes (a) breaches the terms and conditions of this Agreement, (b) repeatedly infringes any third party intellectual property rights; (c) in violation of the spirit of the Game; (d) is harmful to Mythic or other users of the Game (e) lying, misleading or otherwise providing false information to Mythic personnel; (f) is violation of any of the policies/guidelines as set forth in the player rules of conduct, which are posted at www.mythicentertainment.com/rulesofconduct. Mythic may also terminate your account if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information you provide to us, Mythic reserves the right to deny access to any individual as a player of the Game. or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information you provide to us, A copy of these rules, as they existed at the time this CD-ROM was published is contained on this disk in a document entitled "rulesofconduct.txt". All of the Sections of this Agreement survive termination of this Agreement.
* Members whose Accounts have been terminated by Mythic may not access the Game in any manner or any reason, including through any other Account, without the express written permission of Mythic. Active Members may not knowingly allow former Members whose Accounts have been terminated to use the active Member's Accounts.
* Your only right and remedy with respect to any dissatisfaction with the Game is to terminate this Agreement, including, without limitation, any dissatisfaction with (i) any terms and conditions of this Agreement, or any policy or practice of Mythic in operating the Game, (ii) content available in the Game, or any change therein, or (iii) the amount or type of fees or billing methods, or any change thereof.
* IF EITHER PARTY TERMINATES THIS AGREEMENT, THE ACCOUNT WILL BE CLOSED AND MYTHIC WILL NOT REFUND THE BALANCE OF ANY PREPAID PERIOD. WE MAY ALSO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT IF WE DECIDE, IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION, TO DISCONTINUE OFFERING THE GAME, IN WHICH CASE WE MAY PROVIDE YOU, BUT ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO DO SO, WITH A PRORATED REFUND OF ANY PREPAID AMOUNTS. ANY PART OF THE ACCOUNT, CHARACTERS OR DATA STORED THEREON WILL BE LOST AND YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TRANSFER OR ASSIGN THEM TO ANY OTHER ACCOUNTS. IN THE EVENT THAT THE ACCOUNT IS TERMINATED, MYTHIC RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TERMINATE ANY AND ALL OTHER ACCOUNTS THAT SHARE THE MEMBER NAME, PHONE NUMBER, EMAIL ADDRESS, INTERNET PROTOCOL ADDRESS OR CREDIT CARD NUMBER WITH THE TERMINATED ACCOUNT
Limited Warranty
WE PROVIDE THE CD-ROM, THE SOFTWARE, THE ACCOUNT, THE GAME AND ALL OTHER SERVICES "AS IS." WE AND OUR SUPPLIERS EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF TITLE, NONINFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
You acknowledge that because of the complexity of computer technology, Mythic cannot and does not warrant that this product's operation will be uninterrupted and error-free. Without limiting the foregoing, we do not ensure continuous, error-free, secure or virus-free operation of the CD-ROM, the Software, the Game or your Account. Some states do not allow the disclaimer of implied warranties, so the foregoing disclaimer may not apply to you. We do not warrant that the enclosed product or documentations will satisfy the requirements of your computer systems or that the enclosed product or documentations are without defect or error. This warranty gives you specific legal rights and you may also have other legal rights which vary from state to state.
We are not liable for any delay or failure to perform resulting from any causes beyond our reasonable control. Further, we cannot and do not promise or ensure that you will be able to access your Account whenever you want, and there may be extended periods of time when you cannot access your Account.
IN NO EVENT SHALL WE, OUR PARENT, OUR AFFILIATES OR OUR SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO YOU OR TO ANY THIRD PARTY FOR ANY LOST PROFITS OR SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES (HOWEVER ARISING, INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE) ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR ACCOUNT, THE GAME, THE CD-ROM OR THIS AGREEMENT. YOUR REMEDY IS LIMITED TO A REPLACEMENT DISK IN THE EVENT THAT THIS DISK MALFUNCTIONS. Some states do not allow the foregoing limitations of liability, so they may not apply to you.
The warranty and remedies set forth herein are exclusive and in lieu of all others, oral or written, express or implied. No distributor, agent or employee of Mythic is authorized to make any modifications or addition to this warranty.
You shall comply with all applicable laws regarding your use of the Software, your access to your Account and your playing of the Game. Without limiting the foregoing, you may not download, use or otherwise export or re-export the Software except in full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.
Your use of the Game, your access to your Account and your entering into the Game constitutes your agreement to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Mythic and its affiliated companies, employees, contractors, officers and directors from any claim or demand, including reasonable attorney's fees arising our of your use or misuse of the Game, your access to your Account and your playing the Game, including a third party's use or misuse of your account and/or password.
This Agreement is governed in all respects by the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia as such laws are applied to agreements entered into and to be performed entirely within Virginia between Virginia residents, including the provisions of the Uniform Computer Information Transaction Act ("UCITA") as adopted by the Commonwealth of Virginia (Code of VA, 59.1-501.1, et seq. The UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods is expressly disclaimed. Any dispute arising out of this Agreement shall be subject to binding arbitration under the American Arbitration Association ("AAA") Commercial Arbitration Rules with Expedited
Procedures in effect on the date hereof. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such provision shall be struck and the remaining provisions shall be enforced. Our failure to act with respect to a breach by you or others does not waive our right to act with respect to subsequent or similar breaches. You may not assign or transfer this Agreement or your rights hereunder, and any attempt to the contrary is void. This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding and agreement between us and you with respect to the subject matter hereof. Except as provided above, this Agreement may not be amended except in a writing signed by both parties.
All services hereunder are offered by Mythic Entertainment, Inc., 3919 Old Lee Highway Suite 82A, Fairfax, VA 22030. You can reach us during the hours of 9am EST to 5pm EST by calling (703) 934-0169 or by emailing support@mythicentertainment.com. Current rates for using the Game may be obtained from support.darkageofcamelot.com, and such rates are subject to change at any time and without prior notice. If you are a California resident, you may have this same information emailed to you by sending a letter to the foregoing address with your email address and a request for this information.
Vincent J. Murphy
Spandex Justice
Actually, I moderate and wrote a game where you can sell your soul (like a mock stock market)... had my heart rate pacing at about 200 BPM, But as my DSL modem is still fairly idle I think it's safe to assume that Selling your MMORPG soul, is not referring to my game where you can sell your soul (trade) in an online multi-player RPG :-)
BTW: if anyone's interested the address is http://www.soulbay.net... if you get a chance take a look :-)
Who cares... you haven't been able to get a decent price for a Slashdot account since the karma cap went on.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Image if you were buying a bed and you were asked to sign an agreement first. It stated that someone else actually would own your bed, could watch what you do in it, come over and use your bed when you aren't in it, and sell anything they found out about your activities in your bed, would you be comfortable buying that bed? While your computer and your bed may be different, the things that pass through both can be quite personal.
I want to get into the bed making / selling industry!
... but in perusing the comments attached to this story, I've seen quite a few people who are very confused about the nature of contract law.
l
Take a look at:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/topics/contracts.htm
. . . and then try and figure out again why it is that society tolerates lawyers...
about what they sue for. It may just come back and bite them. If this were about something other than gaming, say making a personal backup, or allowing the BSA troops to come in and install spy software on your computer, I think we would see a very different ruling. I don't know if this judge is in the wrong here, but if a ruling were ever made that it was OK for a user to allow someone to install spyware on his machine just because he hit a button when installing, we would see a huge consumer uproar. The KaZaa thing is actaully a good example. People uninstalled it or patched it very quickly after they heard what was in the works.
EULA's are not contracts until they are ruled to be in a court of law (of course IANAL). Up until now, the agreements haven't infringed too much on the user's rights, and if they have, they have been ignored. When the software companies start enforcing unreasonable demands, that's when people will fight back.
I see plenty of people whining about how they can't 'return software' because they don't agree with the EULA. They'll be 'laughed at'.
Where the hell do you people shop? Every small shop I've seen understands tech issues (Though, I wouldn't return something to a small mom and pop shop - it hurts them more than it hurts Foo Corp). Every large chain store shrugs and takes it back without a question. I've gotten mangled discs in boxes, and returned them because of it. Got my money back, and they never even look at the disc or seem to care about my complaint.
If you're shopping in the land of Ghosts and Wind, where they don't accept returns on merchandise, maybe you should stop, eh?
Now, the entire 'have a kid click on it!' crap. That's as weak as the 'but I bought the cd and it's my right to give the music away for free now!' argument. It's even weaker than that garbage you see on emulation sites - 'Yeah! It's legal for 24 hours!' Heh. No it's not. No, it's not. And no, most certainly, it is not.
Yeah. Have a kid click on it. Keep doing that. Demonstrate the fact that you're willfully circumventing the EULA. The lawyers will have your arse in a sling.
Now, for a bit of non-fud. I suggest people start reading EULA's, especially for online games. Ever read one? Verant/Sony and Mythic, at the least, own you. You made Bob the Barbarian warrior. Great, great. You wrote stories about Bob the Barbarian warrior. Great, great. You people realize that V/S or Mythic can take those stories and sell them, and you wouldn't get a dime? Or, if you tried to sell them and they didn't like it, they could easily sue you? (Even if they didn't win, you'd more than likely be fscked.)
Maybe taking EULA's seriously would give them too much legitimacy. But I say, do you want to be the martyr who dies a horrible financial death in the courts?
"For now on, you might just want to read the EULA before you click 'accept'."
I've never accepted an EULA. I never will.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Did Blacksnow buy any product directly from Mythic? I could see a justification for a contract being accepted at that time. Also because Mythic offers an ongoing service, this is a different case from a normal EULA. Blacksnow cannot use the service without permission, so it's perfectly possible that they can be forced to agree to a contract in order to get permission to use that service.
Without seeing the ruling, I think it's premature to say that EULAs are enforcible.
I wish I coudl just vote that post up like I do on dslreports.com as opposed to having to add my own post. That way we could probably eliminate about 75% of the redundant posts here.
just because it is written on a legal form does not mean it is either legal or enforcable. If I make a story about Bob the Barbarian it is theirs to do with but I am not limited from doing with it what I will. Call it a co-ownership. If I write a book later about it, the book is totally mine and they cannot get any royalties from it except for those as demanded by naming content from their games (the race known as PurpleButtElves for example). However, much like a forked project, from the point that I take off and write books and if they so choose to as well, those are seperate, regardless of the character that spawned them.
Most users in this world are tied to a certain operating system (due to the simple lack of equally user-friendly alternatives), and software that comes bundled with it. Many users are also tied to specific software that they use at work.
The same is true to an extent even in gaming. If I like Quake, but not the EULA that id software dishes out, I'd probably sign up and play, for the simple reason that this particular game (Quake) cannot be replaced (there may be many games similar to Quake, but nothing the resembles Quake very closely).
Just what purpose does reading the EULA serve, when pressing the "I Decline" button is simply not an alternative? The root of the problem here is that every single piece of software is a little monopoly - some more, some less. What follows in an potential abuse of the monopoly. This is evident from the way these "interesting" licenses are developed by the key players in the market - Microsoft, KaZaA etc.
It's usually different in brick-and-mortar products. You'll usually be able to find two boxes of cereal with similar taste, manufactured by two different corporations.
With profound apologies to whomsoever this sig originally belonged.
The aricle's author(s) complain that you now have to read an agreement before agreeing to it. Well, no shit einstein! That has always been the case, so this ruling adds nothing new in this regard. What is more interesting is that the EULA was upheld as a whole.
The article doesn't make it clear whether it was the "license" for the service or the actual software that was upheld. The difference is important. I never played whatever game Mythic was producing, but I do know that if you play Diablo, you need to agree to the terms of use of Battle.net separately, if you choose to use it.
Having the terms of use of an online service upheld is reasonable since you have the ability to read the agreement and agree to it prior to using/subscribing to the service, or disagree with it and choose not to use it.
The same is not true for shrink-wrap "licenses". You cannot read the agreement prior to buying the software. By opening the box and installing the software you automatically agree to the "license"... oh, but to see the "license" you need to open the box and install the software! Now, supposedly if you disagree, you can take the software back to the store and get a refund -- but we all know how well that works... So, in effect, you are coerced into accepting whatever terms the software vendor feels like putting in the "license".
The courts have traditionally been sceptical when it comes to enforcing the so-called EULAs. The two supporting cases that I know of are Step-Saver v. Wyse Technology and ARS v. Software Link. There is, to my knowledge, only one case where EULA was upheld outright, "provided that its terms are reasonable" -- ProCD v. Zeidenberg. Interestingly though, that case involved not software but a telephone book on CD. Had the court not held the EULA enforcible, anyone would be free to copy the CD, since, according to the US copyright law, public data (such as names and telephone numbers) cannot be copyrighted.
___
If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
if Stallman had put a "thou shall always be calling it GNU/Linux" clause in the Gpl licence - nobody would notice! :)
>Mythic maintained that (as per their EULA) they owned their virtual world and all property in that world.
Without details of the actual court ruling I can't be sure, but this doesn't sound so unreasonable. The virtual world is being hosted by Mythic's servers, right? Claiming ownership of data residing on their own servers is not so far-fetched. If they want to rent out time and virtual 'property' as part of the Terms of Service for connecting to their servers, that's their prerogative. After all, running those servers does cost Mythic resources. If you want to use their servers, you agree to their terms; otherwise, you play offline, on competing servers, or not at all. It sounds like a Terms of Service issue, not a EULA one.
All this is *very* different from sanctioning EULAs in general. In most situations, you're not connecting to or storing data on the vendor's server. I could not imagine Microsoft laying a successful legal claim to all the Word documents ever generated by Microsoft Office.
Likewise, I can't see this decision being extended to cover every EULA term ever devised. It seems like a very circumscribed case dealing with a very specific issue: who owns the data on Mythic's servers? I suspect even if Mythic's EULA never mentioned ownership of virtual property, the court would still have ruled in Mythic's favor.
Of course this is all just guesswork on my part. IANAL.
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch.
An End User License Agreement effectively grants copyright holders rights the congress has not bestowed upon them.
This has profound implications for all consumer goods. Imagine if Ford used an EULA for their on-board computers. If you don't agree, you can keep the car, but the software (and your ability to use the car) will be disabled.
The makers of a SmartFridge can claim the right to keep track of anything you put in your refridgerator.
Copyright holders can claim that anything you do with their software belongs to them. You use MythicWord to write a your doctoral disertation, and Mythic owns the copyright. This is exactly the precedent the court has supported. You develop a character using Mythic's game, and they own your work.
Congress has the power to grant copyrights. Aside from some constantly expanding experiation date, are their any limits on those rights?
goatse sure gives "End User" a (w)hole new meaning!
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
http://www.skotos.net/articles/BTH_21.shtml (Go down to the section titled "I'll See Your Account Bannings And Raise You $7,000").
http://www.unknownplayer.com/archive/02/03/15/442. php
caveat emptor
I always have someone else click "accept" for me anyway. That way I don't have to agree to the terms. Shared machines are even better, chances are you don't even know the person who clicked accept.
I am only half joking.
-Pete
Soccer Goal Plans
Some of the dumber EULA are sure to be thrown out. Is anyone really going to enforce the "you can't say bad things about M$ with front page" term? Good freaking luck. They might be able to take away that horrible program from you but they can't keep you from telling the world how much they suck.
Privacy is a real concern. The XP EULA grant's M$ the ability to search your computer. You had better believe they already do and will continue to do it. They even changed up their hotmail junk so they could spam you all the way to China. Kazza's gonna sell your cycles to Iraq for wepons development, well I don't think so.
These are all violations of your property and patience, but God help them if they actually break things in a way that lawers can understand. The waste M$ inflicts is huge, some starving lawyer is just waiting to pounce on it. Then poof, the proven illegal monopoly is going to actually pay.
My contracts with M$hit expired a long time ago and I'm much happier for it. You see freedom from all these abuses is closer than you think. Do something good for yourself and dump that privacy invading, insecure,unstable, advert laden junk. The power ends when you don't need it.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
And no, I don't read them either.
But this EULA business is pretty important - after all, isn't the GPL just a EULA, in a certain sense?
Granted, it's a lot less restrictive (requiring you to follow rules only for one kind of use - change - and not all the others) but it'll probably come down to roughly the same thing in the eyes of the law.
So actual, serious enforcement of EULAs is probably in the best interest of software period. It will certainly have two effects: 1. keeping the GPL even more court-defensible, and 2. if people think that the agreement will be enforced, they will tend not to agree to ones that they don't like - enforcing EULAs will make them reasonable.
Right?
~Mac~
Would someone please post the EULAs for Windows 98, 98SE 2000, XP, the service packs for those OSes, for Office 2000 and XP, and their service packs, and SQL Server 7 and 2000 and their service packs, and for Exchange 5.5 and 2000, and their service packs? I don't have them handy. This might be a great way to alter my next year's budget, which I'm making out now. s/Microsoft/Free Software/, if you get my drift.
It would be even handier if someone could point out the heinous sections of each EULA.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
I did just that. M$ EULA states that if you don't agree to thier terms you are supposed to return the software to the retailer.
I (after much arguement with mentally challenged store managers) have returned two products for this reason. Makes a great return excuse when you install and cofirm that the product is poop.
If EULA enforcement and reinforcement in the courts becomes widespread, we will see a rash of programs devoted to automatically eliminating and otherwise blocking EULA agreements from the user's point of view.
If they're going to take that many rights anyway, they may just as well have to do it completely against the user's will. That, and over the course of thousands of installations, it will probably save days of computer time per user over a lifetime.
:^)
Ryan Fenton
...i thought "that thing you never read" was the linked article.
-=tonyt=-
For now on, you might just want to read the EULA before you click 'accept'.
What is this, the 5000th time I've seen that line in a Slashdot article? Maybe people should start paying attention. RTFEULA. If you don't agree with it, don't install it, and write to the company telling them why (and, as you are legally allowed in the US, demand a refund. No product can be forced on you). Look for an alternative with a license you can agree with. It isn't too tough, and it's the only way to make a point to these companies. Using it anyway doesn't work, bitching on Slashdot doesn't work...a large number of persons telling them they refuse to comply with stupid terms and won't buy it will work.
Does that mean that if EULAs are 100% enforceable, that every time a system administrator installs a piece of software with a EULA, the corporate lawyer has to be there to review the EULA to confirm that the EULA is safe for the company to agree to?
Could a system administrator even install the software if she/he was not an officer of the company or otherwise authorized to enter the company into a legally binding contract? (i.e. if the EULA gave the software developer the right to inspect/use the system the company installed it on -- which might also have on it confidential data, customer records, trade secrets, etc.)
Mythic Entertainment and Funcom contracts through one ebayid to sell equipment/gold/characters.
If you attempt to sell on ebay, you'll get banned, but mr does $100,000 a month buisness never gets banned.
God spoke to me
Simple solution: get a 14-year-old to click all the "accept" buttons. Minors cannot be bound by contracts!
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
"NO EULA ABUSE" should become the mantra of the Open Source movement. Or maybe "FREEDOM FROM EULA SLAVERY". If there is one thing more likely to drive people toward Open Source than any other factore, EULA abuse is gonna be it.
I dont understand Camelot Exchange's involment in this case. the EULA is between the players of DAOC and Mythic Entertainment. The people who run Camelot Exchange are not involved in this agreement. If the Camelot Exchange employees never play DAOC, then their site violates no agreement. Anyone using the site would be against this agreement, but the site itself should be free from threat of litigation.
Maybe at the very least we should be able to return a product for refund if you don't agree to the EULA. Only problem is it'd open another door for abuse by pirates. e.g. Getting money back, instead of in-store-credit after doing a :)
'Burn-N-Return'. (just because i've gone so far as coining a term for buying a game, then copying and returning it doesn't mean i've done it!.. much.
Ansi's and stupid tricks!
I tried getting support for my laptop and they said that I couldn't get any help unless I ran the OS that came with it, namely, Windows XP. So, how valid is that EULA when I HAVE to click "I accept" or effectively invalidate my warranty?
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Oh...I didn't read the license - it doesn't apply.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
I called a company that advertises to recycle them and give them away to the needy; yet when I called them and talked to the guy in charge he told me it all gets hauled away! I deguised myself as a purchaser of used equipment and he coughed up all of the beans!
Don't believe your local news about recyled computers, I'm sure it's a scam; they have all lost control of the old technolgy and chances are anything you donate will have a greater chance of ending up in a landfill, than a poor school district!
What this case is about is selling Mythic's intellectual property on eBay. Actually, no, they're selling an item on Mythic's database on eBay. That's the programmers term for it. They are selling the right to that symbolic link on Mythic's server. The SERVICE EULA forbids this.
It just so happens that the software cannot be run without the service. Much like how your telephone can't be used without the telephone service. (House phones, not cell phones with the nifty games.)
I fully believe that MMORPG developers have the right to not allow links on their database to be sold on eBay. Now, if the developer gets ROYALTIES for each link sold, then that would be okay. But I don't see any of these people paying Mythic royalties for selling Mythic's property...
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Any dialog box containing the string EULA would have the bindings of its Yes and No buttons switched.
if you click 'no' you do not agree to the EULA, are you able to return the software? most likely, no, you aren't. most stores have an opened software policy. so... how will this be handled?
Best Buy offers a service with their new computer purchases called a setup. This is done to finish the windows installation and test the system for proper operation. This is also where their tech's accept the user contracts with microsoft and the manufacture's OEM software. By policy and probally even law a service contract is generated which DOES NOT mention anything about user agreements with software companies.
By accepting these contracts could Best Buy be held liable for the contracts their employees accept with out informing the customer first?.?
You can also pay them to install any software for you.
While working for Best Buy Co. for going on five years I have had multiple attempts to have this changed in Best Buy Policy. I have done this not only because I wanted to get out of boring mundane work, but also because it could have made me or my employer liable to these contracts that we accept upto and over 20 times a day.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
PLEASE moderate this post up.
I agree with this post.
DO IT for the CHILDREN! Timmy will thank you when he is cured of head cancer!!!!
MMORPG companies should build the ability to sell a character into the game! Take a little off the top and make an auction house in-game for characters and items. It would be the perfect balance of control and giving the users what they want.
I had never thought of it before but when a person buys a computer from Best Buy, I use them cause I use to work there, they take the computer home turn it on, and then they can either agree or disagree to the EULA which is the first thing they see. NOW in that case they decide but what if someone decided for them. More specificly what about the free setup that Best Buy offers when you purchase a computer. I personal setup hundreds of computers and always blazed right past the EULA cause I was in a hurry. No where on any of Best Buy's paperwork does it say that Best Buy is going to agree to the EULA for you or tell you that they are doing so. My question is does the EULA still apply to the customer that purchased the machine? Now that I think about it, it is kind of like someone forging a signature and more importantly if the customer finds out about the EULA from a someone, would Best Buy be obligated to take the machine back if the person didn't agree? I'm not a lawyer so if anyone has any idea I am curious.
It's time to get rid of EULAs. They are counter to five thousand years of contract law. They are counter to one thousand years of common law. They are counter to both the Commercial Code and Copyright Law (in the US).
EULAs are based on the unwarranted proposition that the author of the software has the exclusive right to use and install the software. This is not true. According to 17 USC 117, the owner of the copy of the software has the right to utilize the software, including adapting it in such a way as to be able to utilize it (e.i. installation). Since the user has the right to use the software, such use cannot be taken as a form of assent to be bound by the license.
But enough of that. What really bugs me is why these turkeys even need EULAs. Pretend you're a proprietary developer wanting to restrict your software. What do you want to restrict? Let's see... No unauthorized copying. No unauthorized distribution. No unauthorized derivative works. In short, just the same stuff a proprietary novelist wants. So why a EULA? Wouldn't a simple copyright statement be just as good? In just about every EULA I've seen (discounting those monstrosities from Microsoft) the only thing they restrict are copying, distribution and modification.
Audio CDs and DVDs don't have EULAs. But if software EULAs get legitimized, it's only a matter of time before the MPAA and RIAA (those scum) get on the gravy train. We don't want that. We don't want to watch a movie in a theater only to see a EULA two hours later saying that be watching the movie we have agreed to post no negative reviews...
If you're a proprietary developer, stop using End User License Agreements. Start using simple copyright statements. You won't lose anything. Your users will thank you.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
maybe this will convince all of those people that spend 90% of their lives playing MMORPG's (like my former roommate) that they ARE NOT REALLY gaining a "blue glowing cofeemaking XL flying folding shield of the dragon" for completing a 200-hour quest that makes em run across Everon 60 times
(yes i was Addicted. but then i discovered the Delete button and EverCrack was no more)
WOOT! perhaps some of those programmers will come back from the Dark Side of EverCrack.
...now to figure out how to get people off SlashCrack...
(ya ya. flame is good.)
Hmm.... If i have to click yes to accept the Windows EULA....what happens if i click "NO". Seriously. This is a legit question....well....as least as legit as anything can be at 12:10 in the morning loaded up on caffeine. Back to my question.... If i were to click no on such an agreement... Would the computer just shut down and wait for me to turn it back on again... Or would it be cool enough to erase Windows from the hard drive. Neat way around the Microsoft tax.
Its late. It made sense when i typed it
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&o
This could be very relevant if remote hosting or remote computing is ever going to grow. Apple got some bad publicity a while back after they claimed ownership of all the content in people's iDisks (or whatever they're called) -- but in that case Apple backed down. What if they hadn't?
Here are some hypothetical situations that seem analagous to the situation with Mythic, that with this precedent all seem a little bit scary...
Consider a cellular phone company. Would my cell phone's voicemail, being hosted on the cellular provider's equipment, be reasonably considered the cellular provider's property? What if a piece of highly confidential data were left there, say an idea for a new invention. Can the cell phone company claim they own that data and then do with it what they like?
Ok, suppose I keep track of my finances with an online service and I enter the data directly in to their remote server -- the data never lives on my computer; it's remote only. Now if the company hosting that service decides to toss a boilerplate "we own everything" clause in to the click-through on the login screen, do they have a right to my financial data? So financial data is too inflammatory...how about an online database of all my books? I don't see that as significantly different from the Mythic case.
Or suppose that a large software company offered remote networked applications via a rental revenue model. The software saves its documents on the remote server. Later I want to retrieve my important documents, but in the meantime the software company has claimed that it owns my documents, based on a clause tucked away in the user license.
Later I want to create a web page. So I upload my web page to a remote hosting site, which of course claims ownership of anythying on its servers. (You'd start to think I'd learn by now!) Later I decide I want to change or remove some information on the site, but the hosting company refuses to give me access claiming I have no right to mess with their data...and then they start selling this content as their own!
If this kind of stuff is not illegal, would you necessarily trust a company not to abuse their rights in this way? Remember that in the last ten or fifteen years there has been a growing consensus in the American business world that anything that can be done to increase profits in the short term necessarily should be done. Glance towards Enron if you believe a company is always going to make the "good" forward thinking choice...
Perhaps we should start lobbying our state legislatures to enact laws to preemptively clear this sort of thing up. Even requiring companies to abide by their agreements as stated the first time a user signs up for a service -- irrespective of how those agreements are initially set up -- would be a positive move. That would make it harder to get blindsided by a change in the user agreement after a person has started using the service (in the syle of Yahoo's "you want Spam" change). And as long as I've got a wish list going, the agreements should be prefaced with a readable easy to understand synopsis of the actual agreement.
But I doubt the business lobby would ever let anything so simple and sensible sneak through a senate chamber someplace...
All the court said, is that the EULA is enforcable. The EULA is a contract and like any reasonable contract, should be enforceable. What if the GPL license was rulled unenforceable and such the authors ARE subject to compensation for damages. I think people around here would be bitching then.
If people are just "so pissed" at this company then they should quit playing the game. A lack of sales that reflects their customer's opinion will show them what their customers think. Again like which ever MS EULA that basically says the software is just "rented", I see nothing wrong with that. No one is forcing people to use this software. If you were stupid and signed a 5yr contract with MS, then too bad for you. I'm sure Apple or Red Hat wouldn't mind the buisness.
The best thing software vendors can do now is to keep EULAs really simple; otherwise, end users will distrust them. It also may strengthen EULAs associated with open source. Altogether, just like strict enforcements of copyrights, this is a win for open source.
The title says it. That does make me vulnerable to changes in EULAs, but I give myself the luxury of chancing that.
I once refused to install a piece of software, Liquid Music (IIRC), that came with my PleXWriter 12/10/32S CD-RW drive. I was to acknowledge that it installed remotely controllable software which they could use to disable their software, but they did not guarantee that it would not otherwise screw up my computeer (again, IIRC).
I contacted PlexWriter's Tech Support and inquired why the hell their Marketing folks ever included something that crappy in their bundled software. The person who responded didn't know, but agreed that they hadn't installed on their home machine either for the same reason.
The moral? Read the damned EULA at least once per publisher no matter how boring they are. You might keep a poisonous snake out of your machine as I did.
My (glib) solution to this whole EULA thing.
1) Buy software at evil corporate retailer. (Windows XP would be good...but any piece of software where you have a grudge against the EULA for would work).
2) Open up the package. Tear open nastily the EULA envelope. Sit on the box. Etc.
3) Attempt to return product to retailer citing the fact that you don't approve of the EULA.
4) Document their refusal. Write down the time and date. Address of the store. Name of the clerk. Speak to the manager. Write down his name.
5) Return home and violate the EULA in every possible offensive way. Put the binaries on your web page. Decompile the code and post it to newsgroups. Send CD copies to everyone in your Zip code. Publish unapproved benchmarks. Whatever.
6) Defend yourself in court. (IANAL) You should have plenty of grounds to prove that you never agreed to any sort of licensing and that the contract was void.
Other than the whole lawyer fees thing, I think it's the perfect solution. What do you think?
Press Decline.
WARNING: May contain quoted copyrighted material that is being used without permission.
I just got a cool new game, in one of those little boxes.
On my receipt from CompUSA, it "clearly" states the return policy for software, and it looks like I cannot open the media if I want to return it.
On the side of the CD case, it says: "Important: Read notice on the back of package before opening"
On the back side of the CD case, and on the packaging it says: "Important: You must accept the enclosed License Agreement before you can use this product. If you do not accept the terms of the License Agreement, you should promptly return the product for a refund."
The CD is sealed.
This all sounds fine and dandy, but there is nothing in the box but this CD and some advertising! I have to load the CD, or "use" the media to read the damn EULA.
According to CompUSA, in order to read the EULA, I give up my right to return the software.
I am sure that I can challenge this in small claims court, but who has the time for that? It is not worth the effort for $50.
That is where they get you.
I checked some of the other games that I have purchased in the past few months, similar story.
What are the chances that once reading the EULA becomes common knowledge, companies will work to make them more obfuscated, convoluted, and otherwise obscure? (does that horrible mess we call the IRS tax code ring a bell, anyone?) If anything, it will be a boon to the legal industry, as many bewildered end users will have to consult with their attorneys just to make sure they understand what it says.
Don't like proprietary EULAs? No problem. Just
be sure that everything install is under the GPL, a BSD license, or similar. Free software licenses do not attempt to either deprive you of your rights, nor obscure your rights (or responsibilities). Every time I read articles like this, I'm just really thankful that I don't have to deal with those EULA issues. I personally use 100% free software and my employer is near 100%. Zeus and Typhoon are the only exceptions.
i think you arent allowed to enter contracts while drunk, so dont install anything with an EULA until you get a nice buzz going..
its a win-win scenario..
For some reason, Microsoft thinks that using some software for updating Windows security holes provides enough value that you will forfeit your free speech rights (by not publishing .Net benchmarks). I'm pretty sure this clause would be thrown out in most courts (and it is related to the NAI anti-disparagement wording that drew a New York state law-suit).
Of course, the other thing I wonder is why Microsoft is so afraid of .Net benchmarks being made public?
In "real world" (whatever that means) games, match fixing, substitution of different players, horses or whatever, and artificial enhancement of performance are contrary to the rules, and indeed are often criminal offences. The companies that have set up to buy and sell identities and capabilities in on-line games are basically set up to do variants of all these illegal things.
It seems to me that if you run a multi-player simulation game, you ought to have the same legal remedies against people trying to subvert your game as do the owners of other games.
The EULA may not be the best way to do it but it is currently the only mechanism available. Perhaps the court took this into account.
Hard cases make bad law.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
If you think about it, some games have flaps for added advertising and others don't, so as we can so there's no standard packaging scheme. If the inside of the "flap" were regularly printed with a EULA and more games were packaged this way you'd have your chance to read it first with only a few games truly "losing" ad space.
"Just my $0.02"
No sig for you!!
When 900 years old YOU reach bounce as good YOU will not!
This is one of the biggest reasons that i have to use linux. The thought of someone else or some other company telling me how to use something ive paid for is to me absolutely absurd. We all know why software companies want to trick us into renting software. They would very much lika an neverending moneyflow like any other water, oil or electricity company. The thing is that software isnt fluid and it doesnt get consumed. They are really trying hard to make just that happen but i think it will nod others like myself over the edge into open source instead. Sure most people will oblige but if the companies begin to maintain there own software (open source) it will snowball. Im yet waiting for a group of companies start working togheter on a common software app. Theese EULA is just sickening!
HTTP/1.1 400
This is another example of a problem that is mostly due to the antics of the 18th Century legal system the U.S. insists on keeping. Copyright laws should be written down in a book, with all relevant details specified, not thrashed out on a case-by-case base so some local court like this one can cause all kinds of confusion nation-wide.
This is how modern legal systems have handled the same problem: German courts (which have professional judges, not the trial-by-jury lottery, and federal law books) have decided that you, the buyer, own that copy of Windows you just paid for and can do with it whatever you want to, since this is basically just another business transaction. Microsoft can claim all they want that you are just "renting" their programs in the EULA, but since German law is (still) above Microsoft's will, they can't touch you if you sell that copy. End of story, at least until the laws are changed. Microsoft, of course, doesn't like to talk about this at all.
But because of this ruling, the German magazine "c't" legally (!) printed a very detailed account on how to create a complete copy of Windows out of that backup CD included with your laptop. A really nice article ["c't", except for their increasingly anti-Linux stance, are IMHO the number one computer magazine on the planet] that probably had Microsoft Germany screaming in the hallways. But notice they didn't try to sue "c't", because they know they would have lost, and the German legal system (well, usually) doesn't just give the prize to the guy with the most money.
(This, by the way, is one of the most anyoing things about Slashdot: Considering how international the user base has become, the editors' outlook is so U.S. centric it make you want to cry. I'm still amazed that they actually use kilobytes instead of bitfeet or cyberinches...).
Slashdot's EULA
:
Here's an interesting snippet
3. REGISTRATION OBLIGATIONS
If required by the site in question, each user must: (a) provide true, accurate, current and complete information on the Service's registration form (collectively, the "Registration Data") and (b) maintain and promptly update the Registration Data as necessary. If, after investigation, we have reasonable grounds to suspect that any user's information is untrue, inaccurate, not current or incomplete, we may suspend or terminate that user's account and prohibit any and all current or future use of the Services (or any portion thereof) by that user other than as expressly provided herein.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
By the same logic that creates this "right to rent" (i.e. the EULA), this right is non-transferable.
I'm informing you in this message that your use of decimal is disturbing to geeks. I think it likely that you do not know what radices mean, or else you would be using hexadecimal. Read about hexadecimal at intuitor and repost your comment using hexadecimal. You may use "0x" as a prefix or "h" as a suffix for the numbers. Intelligent people despise decimal--so try to show some intelligence. Perhaps you are just too stupid to get it. Please reply using this subject--I'll check for replies by it.
Personalized message:
How many seconds?
I'm informing you in this message that your use of decimal is disturbing to geeks. I think it likely that you do not know what radices mean, or else you would be using hexadecimal. Read about hexadecimal at intuitor and repost your comment using hexadecimal. You may use "0x" as a prefix or "h" as a suffix for the numbers. Intelligent people despise decimal--so try to show some intelligence. Perhaps you are just too stupid to get it. Please reply using this subject--I'll check for replies by it.
Personalized message:
How many years?
I'm informing you in this message that your use of decimal is disturbing to geeks. I think it likely that you do not know what radices mean, or else you would be using hexadecimal. Read about hexadecimal at intuitor and repost your comment using hexadecimal. You may use "0x" as a prefix or "h" as a suffix for the numbers. Intelligent people despise decimal--so try to show some intelligence. Perhaps you are just too stupid to get it. Please reply using this subject--I'll check for replies by it.
Personalized message:
How many times?
Remember that this is the EULA for a game. Obviously the game starts with a simulation of being a contract lawyer, and you can win the first level by clicking on "I accept". It's a pretty simple, sure, but games have to start out simple and introduce you to their complexities later. They're more fun that way. I hear that the game discussed here will later allow you to play other characters than contract lawyers; I think that's neat!
One word. Waiver.
Image [sic] if you were buying a bed and you were asked to sign an agreement first. It stated that someone else actually would own your bed, could watch what you do in it, come over and use your bed when you aren't in it, and sell anything they found out about your activities in your bed, would you be comfortable buying that bed?
this is called "marriage"...!
(the sig is wrong, so what?)
667 The Neighbour of the Beast
Are you running Windows? Linux? DOS? Fucking MACOS? Or are OSes for the weak, you code your own kernel right? Wait, nevermind. The compiler has an EULA.
just spit tequila out my nose!!!
From the court, we find that the owners of Blacksnow did their trading in game. Now, argue all you like about most people not reading the EULA, but professional traders have no excuse for not reading it.
As regarding whether they did or not, and whether they clicked through and agreed to it, remember that this is civil litigation. The burden of proof is not beyond all reasonable doubt, but rather balance of probabilities. In deciding what is fact, the court only has to consider the most likely scenario. And the most likely scenario is that Blacksnow (if not the players) did read (or should have read) and did agree to the EULA. If they didn't, then the burden is on them to show that.
Also note that the issue is about the actions that they chose to perform on the service, not what use they made of the software.
Given all this, it looks pretty clear cut that Mythic are right, and Blacksnow are wrong. My only problem with this is that it feels wrong. Effectively, Mythic are saying that they have complete control over everything that happens on their servers, and that they will be the final arbitrator on who did what - and more importantly, why they did it.
The reason that this last point is important is that from the point of view of Mythic, what's the difference between these actions?
The answer is that from Mythic's point of view, there is no difference. The action that Mythic sees is: Player X wants to drop a Sword of Boinking.
Now, Mythic get to decide what the motivation was behind this action, and to punish me or terminate my account without possibility of appeal. In the case of Blacksnow, it looks clear cut, but that's because Blacksnow have been decent enough to be above board about what they have been doing. But now the precedent is set that Mythic and other online services can charge money to access content that they control and can deny access to at any time for any reason that they like, and your option is to suck it up or... actually, there is no "or".
Is that just? Well, actually yes, because it's Mythic's service, they can set the rules, and nobody is forced to play it. Is it enforcable? Demonstrably, yes. Does this kind of control freakery damage online games? Not really, it's rampant on EQ (down to them enforcing their own particular view on what's an appropriate "fantasy genre but non trademarked" name), but that's still going strong.
But does it feel right? Hell, no. Is there anything that we can do about it? Probably not. I wouldn't play such a horribly restrictive game in the first place, and so I don't even have the meagre threat of withholding my money, but the plain old fact is that most players simply don't know and don't care (enough) about it to leave. So, by the Great and Powerful Laws of Capitalism, Mythic is in the right here, and will continue to remain so until the money stops flowing in.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
What happens if I don't consider the product as software? What if its just a plesant arrangment of bits that creates intersting patterns when I force it into memeory of a computer kinda thing I bought for entertainment purposes?
When I click with the entertainment control thingy sometimes it makes different patterns... sometimes not. Thats whats so much fun about it.
Sometimes I try changing the bits to see what happens. Its even more fun.
Since its all pleasant patterns anyway, this EULA thing you keep refering to is just one of the many plesant patterns I guess.
I love the fact that companies spend all that time and effort making all these plesant patterns for me to enjoy and I appreciate the fact that they sell them to me as entertainment products. Which I can do with as I see fit.
The whole copyright argument seems totaly moot to me because they canot control how I perceive my world and what I choose to do.
If they want to think of it as some magical "software" that is perhaps a service or a product depending on what phase of the moon they are in does not bother me.
I just want to frollic in the binary soup that I buy.
Bet it would really piss them off to know that I dont use their product the way they intended. But then again no one has ever really defined that either...
Must be a really confusing world being in "software manufacturing". Stuck between hardware and nowhere.
D
"... every time I open my mouth some of my stupid escapes!"
IANAL, but my understanding is that I can't validly commit my employer, unless I am a corporate officer or acting under direction of one.
This means, for example, that if I issue a purchase order, in the course of my proper duties, it is valid -- and the bill will be paid.
If it is outside my duties, e.g. a complete set of backissues of Astounding, delivered to my home, the bill won't be paid, no contract binds my employer, and the seller sues my ass. And likely my employer fires me.
So, when I click the infamous Accept button, where are we? In a grey area. If the company doesn't like those terms, the argument that they are not a contract with the company is fairly solid. My expertise is not in matters of law, but of software. I am not a corporate officer. Thus I could not bind the company. But the company bought the software -- without seeing the click-through agreement.
Incidentally, for non-shrinkwrap software, it's not uncommon for the license to go through corporate legal. Often it takes weeks and several iterations. It's why companies are often in law suits -- and rarely let that fact bother them.
"Sheer genious!" :)
This is pretty standard stuff. The thinking, or at least part of it, is that they don't want www.jimbobstech-o-rama.com running some half-assed benchmarks on a fucked-up install, and pimping those numbers out as 'representative.'
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Only the state can charge someone with a crime.
The Company is suing you for breach of contract, which is a civil matter.
Let's say you wanted to buy software at the store, or a download site. Let's say then that you read the EULA and didn't agree with it. Will the stores accept the software back with a full refund? Right now, I think not. Are you therefore stuck with the software that you don't want to use but can't return? Can you then sell it since you didn't agree to the EULA? Either the software needs to be fully refundable, or the EULA has to be seen and agreed upon BEFORE the purchase of said software. Perhaps if the software companies were made by law to post their EULA's up front before purchase, they wouldn't be so bold as to sneak nasty things in when they know you are about to agree anyways.
be very careful :
DMCA and EULA are not RFC-92 compliant. FGDi/99 is supposed to solve these kind of GGFTT conficts between JFYER Licencing schemes.
Pls stop these articles.
Pls
Pls
enough is enough.
people just can't read any more acronyms and silly law articles
Moderate me as KIE OIE LLM.DE FCULA pls
More obfuscated, convoluted, and obscure than they are now? It gives me the shudders just thinking of such a thing!
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
I think that MMORPG companies are missing the point entirely with this issue. If you have ever played these games you would see that there is a large interest in exchanging gear, in game coin, or experience points (via "power-leveling"). The person who is seling this stuff still has to get it the same way the person buying it would have, by playing the game. Given the huge audiences of some of these games, why would you limit such transactions? WHy not provide a marketplace for the "merchandise" similar to Ebay and reap the rewards of the extra interest generated and make a nice little percentage charge on each transaction. So what if someone can buy the uber-high-level-whammy-thingy-of-might? It most likely requires more time than anyone with a real life can invest anyway. Where is the harm in accts and such being sold?
EULAs aren't binding. They can't be because they're after-sale restrictions. You can "sign" away because it's not a valid contract (you receive nothing for doing so - the use of the program doesn't count because you already paid for it.)
More importantly, requiring someone to pay you, or sign a contract in your benefit, before you let them use their property, or do something they're legally entitled to do, is extortion. If anyone had to cash to do it, this would be a fairly easy way to fight EULAs.
What is so hard for you fascists to understand? You sell something, you lose control over it.
If this wasn't the case, do you think companies like MS would waste money bribing politicians (oh, sorry, donating to election funds) to get the UCITA passed? The main feature of that law is that EULAs will be enforceable.
If you purchase something in ANY state which contains inside the box (but not outside the box) terms which make it unacceptable to you, you are able to return it REGUARDLESS of what the stores return policy is. Chances are that if you politely explain the circumstances and ask to see the manager if you are refused, you will succeed in returning the item.
I know two people who did this in Massachusetts. In one case, the store (Microcenter) refused. A letter was written demanding payment and refused. A small claims case was filed and treble damages plus court costs were awarded.
Note that the reason she had to go to court at all was, IMHO, that she failed to be polite (as I suggested above).
"If this thing falls over, it's not our fault!"
I am guessing Ford, GM, etc. have lawyers who have already decided that they would lose big time if they tried.
Irv
Nah, the courts are that crazy. If a company (Tobacco and firearms manufactures to be specific here--not trying to beat around the bush) can be held responsible for the actions of an informed individual (ie: knows that guns kill, tobacco is a known carcinogen, other common sense bullshit, etc.), then I don't see it very far off for courts to make parents responsible for some minors' actions.
Well, I'm glad you picked some honourable and decent corporations to use as an example. We can all learn a lesson or two from the way the tobacco and gun manufacturers have conducted themselves. Nothing but integrity there!
What nonsense...
End user agreements are a legally weak system. Their primary use is the implied threat and a pretense of legality. This is a COMMON TACTIC in legal circles. Lawyers are frequently hired to use scare tactics on the untrained: just because it sounds technical/legal doesn't mean courts will see it for anything but the BS that it is.
...myself... well, only if they catch me...
In fact, it is quite likely that the courts will throw out a EULA even if you read it and agreed to it. Excessive, deceptive or overly biased (in a legal sense) contract terms are frequently unenforceable. In particular, the agreements allowing spyware are frequently designed to deceive the user and therefore likely to be tossed out by the court.
The real catch with EULA's is: do you want to be the person going to court over it?
Aye wuld den load up me VI edit0r and write bad, bad, eeevil things aboot da Microsorft group! Yes! VI IS OPENSOURCE...I AM FREE, FREE AS A HURD!
Can you install Linux on this?
"The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." -Harlan Ellison
You know, we hire you to sit here and make value for us (items, interaction with others, ect.) adding value to our game world, while you PAY for the privilege to do so. (Horrible job prospect, IMHO)
It's just like work. You can't take the logo/software/widget you just made and hawk it yourself; it belongs to the company whose tools you used to make it.
The difference is that you get paid $$$ for working at your job; you get paid in 'fun' working at your MMPORG.
If you take a moment to read the ruling, BSI lost because they didn't show up and also looks like they didn't pay their lawers...
...ruling has nothing to do with EULA as that "reporter" proclaims.
Mike
I take the software company to court for selling my personal data (for example) . I contend that the EULA was not presented to me during the install and that possibly a very low-level bug caused this and it may only occur when one clicks buttons on a certain computer at a certain speed (or some other obscure combination of circumstances). In order to make my case I need to disassemble the software. But the DMCA does not allow me to do this.
Is the EULA ruled not enforceable at this point because the DMCA precludes me from proving this? Or must the DMCA be set aside for me to make my case?
Circuit courts cannot establish case law. Only appellate courts can, and only the state Supreme Court can establish case law that is binding on the whole state.
And there's plenty of of other case law that's gone the other way.
This needs to go to the California Supreme Court, and probably the US Supreme Court, too, because it's settled. In the meantime, this article is FUD worthy of Microsoft.
Blacksnow are not very ethical people and are on the record as exploiters of various MMORPGs. They've tried to bribe engineers at the game companies to turn a blind eye to their profiteering from bugs, exploits, and general destruction of the game balance.
When faced with this evidence, how could a judge be sympathetic to them?
Everyone knows that damage is done to the soul by bad motion pictures. -Pope Pius XI
Buy by credit card.
If they won't give you a refund, do a chargeback.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Seems like a good time to mention this 'nomoreeula' script that's going around. I have not used it, nor do I expect it's legal, or that it works in most/all cases. But I like the idea, which is that in the middle of installation, it looks for the EULA and removes the text, while allowing you to click forward. So you can claim you never read it, even though you've installed the software. It's available a couple places, including
l
http://expert.cc.purdue.edu/~erlee/antieula.htm
What I can't figure out (and what frightens me) is that these agreements do not seem to indicate that they only exist for as long as the software is installed. Does Kaaza still have legal rights to your CPU after you uninstall? How far does your permission go?
No Zen is good zen
They never even had a good reason to argue the EULA in this case. There was no sale of Mythics property. Mythic owned the whatever (char, item, gold) before the transaction and they own it after. Only access to that thing was sold.
Science may someday discover what faith has always known.
Suggestions for 1.)fighting software EULAs and 2.)stores that won't accept returns:
1. Get a notary public and a 13 year old. Have the thirteen year-old install the software, click the EULA accept button, and get the notary public to sign a statement saying that the 13 year-old, not the computer owner, installed the software. US law states it's invalid for 13 year-olds to enter into a legally binding contract.
2. Have personalized checks printed withyour own personal EULA printed on it basically saying "By cashing this check you agree to wave any store policies regarding the limitations on accepting a return of the software purchased in conjunction with this check." Of course, you'd want it translated into unreadable legalese and printed in a 6.5 pt font.
As I read the comments it seems most people are thinking of installing EULAs..
;) I would like to think you could apprecaite respect for someone elses computer being accessed remotely. I mean.. if I login and hack your box can I say 'hey.. I installed this ssh program myself, you can't tell me how to use it!'
/.ers read them all though ;) these people were hacking the server... exploiting the server... certainly not something a bunch of sysadmins and sysadmin wannabes should be defending..
THIS IS NOT THE SAME THING!!
Many of the points I read make sense at first... 'if you buy the software you own it, agreements are bs'.. and at first it seems right. But you're forgetting something...
This EULA is not an installation EULA.. its a server usage EULA. Remember, these people not only bought and installed the software... they were RENTING the usage of the server they DID NOT own.
Seeing as how so many of you are SysAdmins (or fancy yourself ones at least
While they may have purchased the software straight out they did not purchase the server and hence must follow the rules of conduct on said server. While I have never ran DAoC I have seen other popular games and I can tell you that you agree to a EULA everytime you login...
The EULA is not to install files.. the EULA is when you access the server. And if you don't think server owners have a right to dictate that then who the hell does?
Oh.. and in case you didn't read the story (i'm sure all
Hm.. now that I mention that, maybe its terrorism *G*
'..that kernel panicked like a nun in a crack house!'
...it was you that pressed that button?
I'm not a lawyer, do understand the law of precedent, also understand the law of proof - yet I can find NOTHING (read that as without founding) that proves my hand clicked that virtual button. In fact the only time you may EVER see a EULA is on installation. Okay, so there is no paper trail, absolutely ZILCH documenting who agreed to what.
So here is the problem. Assume that I wrote a script that automatically clicked on EULA buttons (or any button labeled AGREE). If I stuck a CD in a system and then the system clicks that EULA button, then have I, by default, also agreed? Is it going to get to the point where if you touch the box at the store you automatically agree to the EULA? ("No, I put it back, honestly, I never agreed to anything!!!").
And backing things up, where is the rule of evidence, dammit? If those damnable EULA's are legal, then why can't I vote the same way - oh, because people couldn't be sure it was YOU. Well, big fuckin DUH!
However, because the EULA is less important (oh, right, voting is so important we can barely get 35% of the electorate - mull that over), it deserves LESS inspection? You know, this is a lot like the way they put people to death here in Texas - no evidence, no witnesses, but EVERYONE knows he did it. So the game is on my computer. I use the computer. So OBVIOUSLY I must have done it, right?
Shakespeare got it right "the first thing we do is kill all the lawyers".
IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV
On the other hand, does the judge's admitting that Mythic is owed an arbitration amount to blessing the contractual status of the EULA? Or is that still in question?
IP is just rude.
Is there any torture so subl
If you lived in a apartment and wrote a book, would the owner of the apartment building be able to claim rights to your book? You did it on his property.
You pay rent you say? so, you pay a monthy fee to use the space on there servers.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The deve team for DAOC wants to keep the environment in the game world friendly to the type of players they want playing. Selling off key items to other players for profit really irks them because it means new players miss out on the game somewhat, and more importantly this is NOT the kind of gamer they want in their game world... they are gamers who want online community, not elite haxors and PK/TKs.
Actually, the limiting of benchmarks is a disease only common in the database industry. To the best of my recollection, this practice started right around the time Oracle put a "cheat" mode in to speed up their TPC/A benchmarks.
The point is that these clauses were pretty much only used with a small subset of customers, who purchased large expensive databases with extensive and highly negotiated contracts. Even then this was at best an unethical practice, and was most likely an illegal limitation. Later Microsoft started using it on shrink wrapped copies of SQL Server. Now Microsoft is trying to limit normal consumers, and even worse they are doing it as a stealth attack!
The reason it is most likely illegal goes to the heart of the EULA debate. In the US we have certain default conclusions in a contract, often codified as "Commercial Codes". Formal contracts can change these defaults, but the changes have to be reasonable. Typically it is much harder to change mass consumer purchases. A classic example is when a book publisher tried using a EULA equivalent preventing the purchaser from reselling the book. The courts ruled it an illegal contract since the purchaser was not given anything of value in return for giving up the right of first sale.
The biggest problem with a EULA, is that companies are trying to change a consumer purchase into a negotiated contract. Except of course that the consumer did not actually have a chance to negotiate, usually gets nothing in return, and even than the company usually reserves the right to change the EULA anytime they want to. It makes a mockery of contract law!
So the key to my post was that Microsoft is trying to limit my rights by applying a contract to a normal consumer purchase, and limit those rights without giving me a sufficient return. The mere right to run a Windows patch updating program is not sufficient compensation for me to give up the right of publishing benchmarks on an unrelated program!
Two more comments. First UTICA, the reason why people are so upset with UTICA is because it was a one-sided attempt by the software industry to change the contractual defaults all in their favor, and perhaps even making some previously illegal EULA's either legal, or even unneeded.
Second, there is little-to-no justification for an anti-benchmark clause. Yes, I have no doubt there are some poorly run benchmarks, but why should a company have prior restraint to protect against this? If a person publishes a poor benchmark, expose them and they have no credibility.
Finally, lets drive the consumer vs. negotiated point home. Consider that you buy a book, and as a condition of selling you the book I dictate that you could not publish a review of my book unless I verify your review and gave you prior written permission. I would explain that I want to make sure you have all your facts correct (because previous reviewers misquoted me). That "no review clause" would be illegal, unless you had some special relationship with me: like this was a custom made book with a specially negotiated contract, or I was giving you a special advance copy for free. Without that special relationship, copyright law covers the conditions of the book sale; and copyright law does not give me the rights to restrict your publishing of a review of my book.
If you had bothered to look past the first 2 documents you would have seen these... BTW I have edited the article so that these judgements are easyer to find.
% 20copy.gif
% 20copy.gif
http://www.unknownplayer.com/images/blacksnow/2_3
http://www.unknownplayer.com/images/blacksnow/2_4
Scott Miller
Founder and Editor in Chief
The Unknown Player Network.
http://www.unknownplayer.com
Or am I the only person who read the rulling at the end of the article...
Of course, I didn't see much in the aticle talking about exactly what was/wasn't at issue in the case.
If the issue is: Should the "law" stop people from selling this game items, that's one thing.
If the issue is: Does Mythic have the right to erase player data on their servers, it's quite another.
I use Free Software for everything I do (with one exception), and very much agree with even the more radical ideas that Stallman argues for. Recall that his basic premise is that functional works should not be owned by any one entity.
The one exception is playing Dark Age of Camelot. Why compromise here? Because, quite simply, it isn't a useful piece of software. It's a game. It's not like I'm creating content that mythic is stealing from me. My character has no value outside of the game, and I'm willing to give up control over that character in return for quite a few things.
Mythic does exert a high level of control over the game. Among other things:
- They control the servers.
- They establish rules that define how you can name yourself and your conduct towards others.
- They (attempt to) regulate the economic system in the game via prohibiting item sales.
I'm very glad that they do these things, and I think the game is better because of the control they exert.
Unlike something unregulated like CounterStrike, I don't see people running around named CockMaster and Bl00d-Whore.
I hear of very few cheats, quite possibly because if you are caught, your account will be terminated.
It's not like CS where the worst penalty for cheating is getting banned from one or two servers.
But about the items/characters... I don't *want* people to be able to buy and sell items/characters. I've worked hard to get my character where he is, and to get good items I've had to work a lot. The game is competitive, and buying items / characters is frankly unfair to the players who play legitimately.
You people need to get a life and realize that this isn't exactly Office here. It's not like anyone is being forced to play DAoC to meet some standard, and it's not like Mythic is abusing its marketing power.
If you think you need to have the rights to sell your players and items, play Diablo 2. You can download some duping-programs and set yourself up an account on ebay. I hear it pays a good $80 a week if you're good at it. Really a good way to enjoy playing the game.