Slashdot Mirror
Man Finds $1,000 Prize in EULA
bhtooefr writes "When Doug Heckman was installing a PC Pitstop program, he actually read the EULA. In it, he found a clause stating that he could get financial compensation if he e-mailed PC Pitstop. The result: a $1,000 check, and proof that people don't read EULAs (3,000 people before him didn't notice it). The goal of this was to prove that one should read all EULAs, so that one can see if an app is spyware if it is buried in the EULA."
so that one can see if an app is spyware if it is buried in the EULA
Because all spyware apps include a EULA with "THIS IS SPYWARE" in big bold letters? People don't read EULA's because they are legal fluff and mean nothing to the average reader. I personally would like to see a standard, simple format for EULA's like credit card companies do with rate disclosures. Otherwise most users have no idea what they have just agreed to.
OK, so it took me just a few minutes more to find it (not the slashdot story itself, but the correct subject anyways). I guess you could say 'the karma's in the mail' now?
Is this what you were looking for, my good man?
IANAL, but from what various law classes have taught me...
When it's generally accepted that what is being put in front of you is for a specific purpose (i.e. consent for surgery or permission to run a credit check), all you need to ask for is if there's anything in the contract that you need to know. If there's anything that would not be expected (e.g. 'if you die we get your organs'), then they will tell you, and if they don't, it's not enforcable.
I imagine that if tested in court, EULAs would be considered in the same realm.