Slashdot Mirror
Gator's EULA Dissected
theVP writes "Ben Edelman has recently written up his disassembly of the Gator EULA. He has come across some interesting finds, including the fact that their EULA states that you can't remove their software via 3rd-party means, as well as prohibiting the use of packet sniffers or intercepting the data coming from their software."
That if they ever decided to try to legally enforce that EULA that the fact that their software installs itself without permission or intervention from the user invalidates it. The legitimacy of EULA's aside, they usually say they're activated by using the software. You don't really use Gator/Claria/whatever they're calling themselves now, and most of the people who have it probably don't even know they have it, so you don't do anything to enter into the agreement.
Often times, it's mentioned on /., K5, Fark, etc. that EULAs aren't enforceable as a contract. Would this be a good case for someone to take Gator to court over, since Gator seems to want to restrict a person's ability to use thier computer? Would a judgement against Gator cause other companies to be less restrictive in their EULA terms? Or, would other companies just point and laugh (figuratively) at Gator for getting nailed?
Overrated / Underrated : Moderation
The USER of this SOFTWARE gives up all rights to their immortal SOUL. Any attempt to regain the rights to your SOUL will result in immediate banishment.
Have a great Gator day!
Prontab.net - Porn for geeks. (nsfw)
I think that would set a very bad precident on what the government would accept as grounds for capitol punishment. Afterwards, people would be saying, "You killed those bastards for making spyware, why is my neighbor still alive? He walked on my goddamn lawn!" and so forth.
Now angry mobs armed with torches and pitchforks, on the other hand, have nothing to do with the government and I hear they make for some damn fine keggars afterwards.
Is it really that typical to prohibit use of packet sniffers? Any other programs include this in their EULA? I've never seen it before, though perhaps I haven't been reading the right EULAs.
If programs can prohibit packet-sniffers, then how are users (or researchers or testers or auditors) supposed to confirm whether or not programs are complying with their own privacy policies?
Gator's license, as presented by Kazaa, merges section headings in with body text. No bold type separates section headings from the paragraphs that follow. For that matter, no line breaks separate the headings from the paragraphs. They're just all merged together.
Example:
Seriously! See screenshots.
Rogabean writes: "When you installed say, Kazaa, you agreed that in exchange for running Kazaa for free that you also agree to run for instance Gator. So removing Gator should entail removing Kazaa or whatever program bundled it. I can't argue that point."
Certainly Gator claims that Gator is required in exchange for getting Kazaa for free. Whether or not users understand this and meaningfully accept it is another question, of course. If they did, there's a certain persuassive force to Gator's requirement that Gator stay as long as Kazaa stays.
But why not put an Add/Remove entry in Control Panel that lists Gator? Selecting Gator's Remove entry would trigger a popup that prompts "Warning: Removing Gator will remove Kazaa too. Do you want to continue?"
This way, users could always get rid of Gator by going to Control Panel and removing the Gator item, just like any other program.
In contrast, as it stands, users must figure out what programs came with Gator, then separately remove each of those programs. The current procedure is quite a bit longer and more complicated than what I propose, and quite a bit less intuitive and more complicated than removal of most other Windows programs.
I think the death penalty is justified for sitting stopped in front of me when you have a free acceleration lane to use to merge with traffic.
And for not realizing it's legal to make a left hand turn on red from one one-way street onto another.
And for hanging out in the passing lane on the freeway while people are passing you on the right.
And for being my mother-in-law.
09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
Jesus loves you, I think you suck
Next, companies will prohibit users from even reading the EULA or discussing the EULA with others. Its not unlike the database EULAs that prohibit the sharing of benchmark results. This type of contractual control of communications is bad for achieving the transparency needed for true capitalist competition.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Yes. Recall the New York Attorney General's successful suit against Network Associates, challenging a EULA prohibiting posting benchmarks or reviews without consent.
"Judge Orders Software Developer to Remove and Stop Using Deceptive and Restrictive Clauses" - NY AG's office
So what's Gator's remedy if you violate the EULA? They consider the contract broken and you can't use their software anymore?
Great! That's what I want - your crap spyware gone. Now please enforce the EULA.
the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
There is nothing really shocking in prohibiting the use of packet sniffers
The "shocking" thing is that they think the clause does anything.
If I wanted to sniff Gator packets, well, I sure as hell wouldn't install it on my machine anyhow. I'd get one of my friends to install it and use it on the local network, and I'd stiff those packets.
I am not bound by the license and as it would be my network I can do whatever sniffing I want. Legally I couldn't "do whatever the hell I wanted" with the data since copyright could still apply, but the interesting data that I might want to share with the public about what Gator sends couldn't be copyrighted as it would be the output of their program, and would also merely be factual data. (So even if they tried to include a copyrighted signiture or something in their packet, they couldn't stop me from stripping that out and still talking about what I saw.)
Pointless provision, and there's not a damned thing they can do about it either. (Force the user to agree not to let anybody else packet sniff? Yeah, I'd like to be able to prevent other parties from packet sniffing, but I seem to lack that power.)
Wait, so they are asserting they own control of any network which has had Gator installed? If I have a home LAN, and I'm sniffing packets on my LAN, those packets belong to me. So if someone installs it on a corporate computer, then the IT department is now prohibited from reading their own packet data?
They also claim that someone who installs a piece of software on a machine can make anyone else who uses that machine bound by that agreement? How the hell does that work? "By clicking here, your agree your sister will have sex with me" is not a valid license. And if the user wasn't the duly authorized 'owner' of the machine, is their entire license void???
Good god. I completely can't see how any of this shit is legal. Not even remotely. Especially since it piggy-backs its installs with so many other things.
Sheesh. No wonder I do my web surfing on Mozilla on a FreeBSD box behind a firewall. Good luck putting gator on that.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I'm wondering if anyone is working on documenting how the spyware EULAs, like Gator's, might violate any one of the many Microsoft product EULAs, and how that violation might be used to leverage Microsoft(or it's board) into smashing the alimighty Hammer of Bill on these spyware companies.
Say like folks who use/subscribe to MSN services( MSN Wallet, bCentral, MSN Shopping, Expedia, MSN Maps, MSN Music, etc) or the application services (Passport, Messenger, Encarta, Money, MSN Toobar, Mappoint, Streets and Trips, Picturte It, Windows Media, etc, etc..), can there not be conflicts between Gator's EULA and any of these M$ product EULAs and servcies websites terms of use for the data they collect and claim "ownership" to?
It would seem Microsoft could gain some ground with users if, instead of focusing on attacking Open Source products and their infringement on M$ EULA, to target the compainies exploiting the vulnerabilities of their software and it's users, aka GATOR. Everyone would cheer that effort.