Slashdot Mirror
Making Sense of Software EULAs
Brian E. writes "An informal Clearware.org poll indicates that 67% of the 66 respondants never or rarely completely read end-user license agreements (EULAs). Clearware.org aims to make sense of software by proposing guidelines for vendors to characterize end-user license agreements. Defined characteristics include terms and conditions found in existing EULAs that impact control over the user's experience, privacy and system security. The guideline extends on the idea of Creative Commons' commons deed and RDF/XML metadata formats. This simplifies EULA terms in a consumer friendly way similar to care labels on clothing, nutrition facts on food and warnings on hazardous materials."
An informal Clearware.org poll indicates that 67% of the 66 respondants never or rarely completely read end-user license agreements
:-)
67%? or Perhaps 66.666666667?
I'm still thinking that 33% of respondants lied if they say they always completely read the EULA.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
I believe it should read:
An informal Clearware.org poll indicates that 67% of the 66 respondants never or rarely comply to end-user license agreements (EULAs).
"You will pay for your lack of vision..." - Emperor Palpatine to Ray Charles
Get back to me when there's more, many more, data points.
Based on my experience, I know of one other person who knows what an EULA is even though they never read them.
Guidlines might be good though. The downside is an EULA may become more enforceable.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
Troll TROLLING PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, June 1991
Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Troll's Foundation, Inc.
59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
Preamble
The licenses for most Troll's are designed to take away your freedom to share and change it. By contrast, the Troll Trolling Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free Troll's--to make sure the Troll's is free for all its users. This Trolling Public License applies to most of the Slashdot Troll's Troll's and to any other troll whose authors commit to using it. (Some other Free Troll's Foundation Troll's is covered by the Troll Library Trolling Public License instead.) You can apply it to your trolls, too.
When we speak of free Troll's, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our Trolling Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free Troll's (and charge for this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the Troll's or use pieces of it in new free trolls; and that you know you can do these things.
To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights. These restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you distribute copies of the Troll's, or if you modify it.
For example, if you distribute copies of such a troll, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their rights.
We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the Troll's, and (2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the Troll's.
Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain that everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free Troll's. If the Troll's is modified by someone else and passed on, we want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors' reputations.
Finally, any free troll is threatened constantly by Troll's patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free troll will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the troll proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.
The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and modification follow.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
0. This License applies to any troll or other work which contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under the terms of this Trolling Public License. The "Troll", below, refers to any such troll or work, and a "work based on the Troll" means either the Troll or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Troll or a portion of it, either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another language. (Hereinafter, translation is included without limitation in the term "modification".) Each licensee is addressed as "you".
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Troll is not restricted, and the output from the Troll is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Troll (independent of having been made by running the Troll). Whether that is true depends on what the Troll does.
1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Troll's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep
IANAL (hate that acronym), but as I recently understood it, EULA's are in almost all regards unenforcable as they are contracts forged under duress. I pretty much have stopped reading them.
66 respondants is statistically insignificant. They might as well have said " 66 people say that the sky is falling "
Yes, you are right, they answered it that way because they hadnt read the question completely. :)
PROBABLY BECAUSE READING ALL UPPERCASE LETTERS IS SO ANNOYING.
And a little more white space didn't kill anyone (at least I'm fairely certain of it). In short, the EULA's I've seen, are designed to annoy the reader as much as possible.
For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
I agree
Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
-- Stu
/. ID under 2,000. I feel old now.
The first rule of the EULA is "We do not talk about the EULA"
The second rule of the EULA is "WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT THE EULA"
The third rule of the EULA is "You may not read the EULA"
The fourth and final rule of the EULA is "No matter what, everyone signs"
From Clearware.org:
Number of Voters: 92
First Vote: Sunday, 02 April 2006 03:22
Last Vote: Monday, 17 April 2006 16:24
Move along... Nothing to see here... this has been going on for over two weeks and has only 92 votes. This sample is so unrepresentative it's not funny. When they have well over 10,000 votes and have done a statistical analysis based on age, gender, household income, etc., let me know.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
just adopt the HAZMAT signage directly for software? I mean, it seems to cover pretty much the same ground.
Eula (oi-LAH) n. Stage name for a Swiss mathematician turned gangsta rap artist.
The whole purposes of these EULAs is not to communicate clearly, nor to negotiate a good-faith bargain, but to manipulate consumers in putting their apparent agreement on record.
A landlord has no interest in pointing out that the "standard lease form" he shoves at you is one of many, and that he picked the most one-sided one he could find. He is certainly not going to say "Actually clause 16 is against the law and unenforceable in this state, but I hope you don't know that because most of my tenants don't and its a minor but valued source of extra profit for me."
Car rental companies were required to print their agreements in a certain type size so that at least it was possible to read them... if you didn't mind holding up a line of people behind you... and they responded by printing them in larger type, but using a color scheme of dark grey on white grey.
Food companies don't list their ingredients on the label because they like the idea, but because they were dragged kicking and screaming by the Pure Food and Drug Act and its successors. And they constantly negotiate for weaselly exceptions. For example, ingredients must be listed in order of predominance, but they are allowed to say "beef and pork" as long as the food includes both beef and pork, even if there is more pork than beef...
In what way would a clear-language EULA serve the interest of the vendor?
If it did, in fact, serve the interest of the vendor better than the current murky EULAs, I suspect some vendors would be using them already. If, as I believe, it does not serve the interest of the vendor, then why on earth would they agree to use them unless required to by law?
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
...those that draw up the EULA doesn't want it to be clear, nor short. Seriously, if you knew that the other party is going to sign it anyway, wouldn't you want to put in as many catches for the customer and freedoms for yourself as you can, preferably obscured both in terms of size and language? In the worst case, you can tell the customer "that's not what it says, you're reading it wrong" and in the worst case a court will say "no, that part of the EULA is not valid". You lose nothing by trying, not having a "standard" license isn't any disadvantage because there's no major standard.
I wish there was a "BSA General End-User License Agreement" which contained all the usual legalese, and if software wouldn't use it they'd need to "explain" why they can't use it. Then you could get some proper legal analysis of it that would be reusable on all other software using the same license. When DRM comes to enforce all the currently unenforcable restrictions, I think we will need it. As it is, I click "I Agree" and ignore with impunity because I can and because spending $1000 to have a lawyer go through a 20-page license for a $50 product where there's no room for negotiation is ridiculous.
To me, if it acts like a sale I treat it mostly like a sale. Copyright, limitations on number of installs/users, private/commercial use, disclaimers and perhaps a few other things ok, the rest... fuck off. The toothbrush company don't get to tell me when, what, how or where to brush my teeth, what brands of toothpaste works or how to use it together with mouth water and dental floss. And I mean that even if they put "By opening this packaging, you agree to the terms and conditions. If not, you can return it for a refund" on it.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The problem with EULAs is not the confusing legalese, it's the content. Would you buy a car from someone who demanded that you waive all rights to sue, even if he deliberately comitted fraud? Would you also agree that he still owned the car, and that he could grant you a license to drive it as long as you never benchmarked it (looked at the speedometer?) Would you agree that he could lock the wheels or take it back at any time for any reason?
And if you did agree to that with your boss'es money, would you expect to keep your job?
Anyone who agrees on behalf of a corporation to a typical commerical EULA is guilty of serious crimes, especially criminal negligence.
Andy Out!
All EULA's have some sort of sentence near the top reading similar to: "By purchasing this product, you agree to..."
There's your loophole right there. The rest of you aren't actually paying for any of this crap, are you?
similar to care labels on clothing, nutrition facts on food and warnings on hazardous materials."
This is EXACTLY what we need...I envision a big label across the Windows Vista CD: "SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: VISTA MAY CAUSE LUNG CANCER, EMPHYSEMA, AND BIRTH DEFECTS."
lately, I've been trying to keep track of all of the EULA's I've been agreeing to. It's overwhelming.
This wiki
http://www.gripewiki.com/index.php/EULA_Library
is trying to keep a public record of eulas (along with some analysis).
Robert Nagle, Idiotprogrammer, Houston
Many download sites make you click "Accept" buttons, but if you actually try to READ the damned 15-25 pages of the EULA, you find the web site "times out" and you can't then proceed with the purchase/registration process.
No wonder people don't read them. I don't do it online anymore.
I get depressed every time I read an EULA. They disclaim all responsibility and warranties, basically saying that if they deliver useless crap, you will just have to smile and be grateful that they relieved you of all that excess money. You have to be a lawyer to know what parts are enforceable, what parts are questionable, and what parts are legal bullshit. It isn't a negotiated agreement between two parties, it's the strong dictating terms to the weak.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Speaking as a software engineer I can honestly say that I despise writing these things as much as most users do reading them. However, they are unfortunately very necessary in the often litigious society in which we live if for no other reason than to protect the author from frivolous litigation. Even if you give your software away for free you still have to include those clauses disclaiming liabilities for "loss of business" (on a free product no less, but some people really do have that much nerve), "merchantability", and/or "fitness for a particular purpose", and all the rest of that crap. If there were fewer asshat attorneys that sue anyone at the drop of hat then these types of verbose agreements would not be as necessary. You say "just use the GPL" but that is not always an option because of certain clauses in the GPL that limit ones ability to restrict access to trade secrets. I am not knocking the GPL, if you want to license your work under those terms then go ahead, but it is not always possible from a business standpoint. The excessive legalese in our society is an antibody to the excessive amount of litigation, in fact I have read, cannot remember the source, that the United States spends as much as 2% of GDP on lawsuits which is many times more than any other developed nation in the world. So we don't like those long EULAs either but the lawyers made us do it.
I'm probably completely of the mark...but if I were right, what fun it would be to challenge the right of states to collect sales tax on software because of the EULA! I bet courts would start ruling EULAs invalid right and left...
Great men are almost always bad men--Lord Acton's Corollary
As far as I can see and as long as I have used computers be it M$ Windows or the Macintosh. I have read about 2 of the EULAs that have came with the software. I mean what is the point when you read them if they make any kind cents to the every day joe out there. Not the blood suckers. I mean when you set donw and read one of this things. Alot of what you are going to do with program one way or ther other is not even 1 take in to a count for. or 2 It's brakeing the EULA in the first place. I mean look at DVD ripers be it on the Mac or windows side of things. the EULAs in them make it so that by clicking on the buton that you have just broke the law as long as you are in the US. I mean all this EULAs are good for to is be able to sue someone or for the person(s) that made the software be able to run away and not get there ass in the fire for makeing a pice of software that openly make there paying joes. Into outlaws with out so much as the person(s) being held resable for make the every day joe think it's ok for them to do this as long as they buy the software. I say it's time that the EULAs be reworked so that they not only cover the person(s) that made the software but the end user as will.
First day on the job, I was getting settled into my new office and checking out my computers. The Mac needed updates so I started the process. The EULAs came up and I was skimming the first few lines while I talked to my boss. The word "death" caught my eye so I started reading that one aloud. It said something like "use of this software may cause death". He didn't believe me until he saw it for himself.
What could I do? I need to keep my systems up to date. So now Apple's in the clear if I die as a result of using their software.
If you have the time and the money, here is a new hobby for you....
1. Buy lots of software at your local big-name retail outlet.
2. In your excitement, rip open the boxes and get access to the EULA.
3. If the EULA is on the CD, open the CD case, load the CD and get to the EULA.
4. Disagree with it.
5. Return the software in opened packaging, for a full refund.
6. If your big-name retail outlet refuses then the software vendor *must* refund it,
7. No you will not pay for shipping. You will happily throw it all in the trash can if they refund the money.
8. If they don't want to refund, take them to small claims court.
9. Argue that the full EULA should have been visible on the outside of the packaging in reasonable size type.
10. If you are vision impaired, argue that the Braile EULA should be on the packaging too or that typeface should be large print.
Remeber to keep copies of your receipts and correspondences!
No sig. Move along - nothing to see here.
There is a program called EULAlyzer that could help to understand the EULAs clearly and better.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
>3. If you break the license, how do i get my money back
Problem is, in most EULA, there is NO way for them to break the contract since they promise nothing and have no responsaibilites.
And just how do we get to read the EULA for a paticular company's product without purchasing it?
I, for one, am not blessed with ability to read the EULA from the CD enclosed within a shrinkwrapped cardboard box... No matter how long I press the box against my forehead.
No sig. Move along - nothing to see here.