The skinny on EULAs

bearkub

http://www.okratas.com/modules.php?op=mo...r=0&thold=0

This was posted over at slashdot and I think it is a pretty worth-while read for most people here. This guy is a lawyer (so I understand...) and explains EULAs and the enforceability of them in pretty easy-to-understand terms.

ElysiumGX

sounds right. always best to read the fine print. pressing the "I agree" button means you agree to shut the hell up when you have a complaint about policy.

KDR_11k

The problem is that he's talking about MMOGs and some of his points aren't applicable to offline games. For example, the bit about agreeing to a service or paying fees. With an offline game you aren't required to subscribe to any service because all you have is a software package that you install on your box. Unlike a service's ToS the EULA doesn't give the user an additional offer, it merely revokes his purchase. Also, the manufacturer doesn't get a proof of acceptance because you might have used some trickery to go around the EULA (say, used a program to alter the text displayed before agreeing). With an MMOG the server knows you accepted, with an online game all they know is that you purchased the game. Besides, noone needs an EULA to go against the guy in that ProCD case because there's already a law handling this, copyright law. Hell, console games don't use EULAs yet you aren't allowed to copy them!
And the point about knowing what to expect is invalidated if an EULA has unexpected clauses. E.g. the Doom 3 EULA prohibits cheating, which the majority of EULAs don't mention. Some EULAs prohibit resale while most permit this. What gives?
The MMOG bit annoys me the most about this article as MMOGs are a minority and since some of his points don't apply to offline software I'm not sure how valid this would be for those (and it gets even more confusing in different countries...).

Another point in the Steam debate was that you weren't informed about the requirement of a subscription prior to the purchase and that noone can be expected to know that this one game requires an additional service contract since games usually don't do that. I couldn't find a mention of Steam or even the EULA on the HL2 box.

MacD

Which is why some people run scripts to replace any EULA.txt file with a blank text file :P

Or just get the neighbour's kid to click the button :P

-edit-
Man, KDR...you beat me to my own punchline

Asthane

[ QUOTE ]
MMOGs are a minority

[/ QUOTE ]

KeyserSoze

How many people here actually read EULAs from beginning to end, or even at all? I don't. I just adhere to the rules of copyright law, and other obvious laws, and click 'I agree' without reading a single word. I'm referring to videogames here. I do read EULAs for certain software that I may want to use in a particular way or for a particular purpose (e.g. creating something with open source software such as GIMP, and using the work I created in a commercial way).

EULAs are pretty useless in my opinion (especially those for videogames).

MacD

Well, for games I guess it depends on if you're gonna do something with it: when you mod for UT, Quake or NWN, I bet you actually are slightly more inclined to read the EULA.

Anyway, where it turns screwy is when a company decides to use user-modded-content in their expansion packs; EULA might say they can do so, but morally they'd have to pay the modder, imo.

MoP

"Morally" has never made a blind bit of difference to the money-making industries

I don't think I've ever read more than one paragraph of any EULA, ever. So arrest me.

KeyserSoze

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, where it turns screwy is when a company decides to use user-modded-content in their expansion packs; EULA might say they can do so, but morally they'd have to pay the modder, imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

Legally they would have to get the approval of the modder. That is, if the mod used any custom art assets or code that didn't originally come with the game, they would have to make a deal with the creator since the company wouldn't hold the copyright to that material.

I don't think that's ever been a problem, though. Every mod that I'm aware of that has gone retail, the mod makers got a deal and had to make an agreement for their compensation. I'm pretty sure it's almost always a mutual thing.

KDR_11k

I read any EULA that I suspect of containing "nasty" parts. I generaly scan EULAs for untrustworthy software (e.g. Steam) for paragraphs talking about extra rights towards your computer's ressources and personal data.

I think once a court even decided that some extra clause in an EULA was invalid becuase "nobody reads those things anyway". There's a general assumption towards what's in these things (basically repeating copyright law) and anything outside of this general assumption seems to fall under different rules (precedent cases cited by the article also claimed that "people know what's in those EULAs anyway").

So we still haven't got any explaination what kind of stuff they can legally ask from you and under which conditions it's valid in an EULA.

I've heard there once was a dissection of the Windows EULA that found that over 50% of the EULA's provisions violated the law.

So basically an EULA is more an End User Confusion Document (which coincidentally abbreviates to EUCD which is one of the worst pieces of legislation ever passed in the European Union) that doesn't make anything clear since you never know which parts are applicable and which ones are pure bullshit.