Every time I install a new program or sign up for a website on my computer, I roll my eyes at the paragraphs of legalese contained in the End User License Agreement and think to myself, “Who the hell reads these things anyway?”
It turns out that even those who preside over the highest court in the land don’t even bother to read EULAs.
At a speaking engagement at Canisius College in Buffalo, N.Y., Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. responded to a student’s question by admitting that he’s frustrated by fine print as much as anybody and usually doesn’t read the agreements himself.
Roberts says that the legal system is to blame for the onslaught of fine print associated with everything including software and medications. “Providing too much information defeats the purpose of disclosure, since no one reads it,” he said. “What the answer is, I don’t know.”
The EULA is, of course, an important thing since it contains all of the rules that a company sets forth and users must comply in order to legally use the product.
Blizzard recently invoked the terms included in their EULA for Starcraft II as justification for banning thousands of players accused of using cheat codes and filing suit against three people who allegedly created the codes.
Mike Masnik at Tech Dirt points out that a ruling in Blizzard’s favor in this case could lead to several other companies citing EULA violations for copyright infringement claims. “If Blizzard is allowed to make these claims, then any software/content company that offers you a long license, where you don’t obey each and every claim, can say you’ve infringed on their copyright and owe huge statutory damages,” Masnik wrote in his post about the case.
Like Roberts, I don’t know what a fair solution would be to the problem. In this increasingly litigious society, corporations need a way to protect themselves and their products and pages of fine print seems like the most logical way of accomplishing that. Maybe someday there will be a better way.
9 Comments on Even Supreme Court justices don’t read EULAs
Yes I do read them all even if they all are similar in what they say, I just don't believe in "Trust thy neighbor/fellow man"
Just my .02 cents tossed in.
SJ
Surely this is wrong, and I thought they were being challenged.
|
Originally Posted by Matth
One problem with these EULAs, is that they are agreements obtained under duress, for something which you have already paid for without being made aware of such terms beforehand.
Surely this is wrong, and I thought they were being challenged. |
SJ
First - You have to accept the agreement to go ahead and install/use the software and unlike most agreements written on paper, you don't even have to sign your name to be locked in to the agreement.
Second - If you don't accept the agreement, you can't bring the software back for a refund, at least for most software products. I remember about 6 years ago when I worked for an IT support company, I realised that "Microsoft Windows 2003 for Small Business Server" and "Microsoft Windows 2003 Small Business Server Standard" are two completely different OS's after a costly mistake!
At the time, I bought the wrong OS not realising it and to my surprise, I could not find Microsoft Exchange, so I called up Microsoft asking how to get it and they said that Exchange is not included with this OS. I said that both the Standard and Premium version comes with exchange and these are the only two SBS versions listed on their website, but they said that the version I have is actually another version (not on their website) and is just Windows Server 2003 with several limitations imposed, unlike the Standard/Premium SBS versions that come bundled with Exchange, SQL, Outlook, etc. Sure enough, I could not get a refund as once the seal on the box is broken, it cannot be returned, even if you don't even touch the content inside, never mind accepting the agreement at installation.
So with software, always try before you buy where possible! If you buy a printer, phone, kettle, etc. and are not happy, you can generally bring it back for a refund or store credit. If you're not happy with a software package you purchased, then it is tough luck.
|
Originally Posted by StormJumper
The last time I ticked "I do not agree" to the terms of a EULA the purchase process was canceled and the software was not installed.
SJ |
Since the EULA is not completed PRIOR to the Acceptance and Consideration, it constitutes and illegal modification of the contract and is null and void. The fact that under SOME circumstances the Software vendor might refund your money if you don't agree with the EULA is irrelevant. Since the EULA was not part of the original offer, neither the acceptance nor the consideration are contingent upon it.
This has not yet been ruled on by the US Supreme Court, however at some point it must be. The remedy is quite simple. The EULA must be disclosed and signed prior to payment.
|
Originally Posted by StormJumper
The last time I ticked "I do not agree" to the terms of a EULA the purchase process was canceled and the software was not installed.
SJ |
|
Originally Posted by Gweedosezz
Technically all EULA's are illegal, at least in the USA. Under US Contract law, three things are required for a contract to be valid. 1) An Offfer 2) an Acceptance and, 3) a Consideration. The Software Vendor offers the item for sale, the User accepts that offer and remits a Consideration (payment). At that point the contract is complete and neither party may alter it in any way without mutal agrrement from both parties.
Since the EULA is not completed PRIOR to the Acceptance and Consideration, it constitutes and illegal modification of the contract and is null and void. The fact that under SOME circumstances the Software vendor might refund your money if you don't agree with the EULA is irrelevant. Since the EULA was not part of the original offer, neither the acceptance nor the consideration are contingent upon it. This has not yet been ruled on by the US Supreme Court, however at some point it must be. The remedy is quite simple. The EULA must be disclosed and signed prior to payment. |
BTW...All EULA's are technically illegal
so what you are saying is that Microsoft, Apple and all the other software manufacturers are braking the law if I remember right a few government run company's also use EULA's, but like you said "This has not yet been ruled on by the US Supreme Court"SJ
Most popular headlines
Windows Blue to allow boot to desktop and brings start menu back? (3)
- Tue 16 Apr 16:12 by DoMiN8ToR
- Software, Windows 8
The upcoming update of Windows 8 might allow users to boot to the desktop again.
Jobs in US entertainment industry on all-time high - piracy?! (8)
- Fri 12 Apr 15:10 by DoMiN8ToR
- Piracy
The number of jobs in the film and music industry in the United States has increased despite the claimed negative effects of illegal downloads.
The Piratebay domain moves to Greenland - circumvents blockade (3)
- Tue 9 Apr 14:23 by DoMiN8ToR
- Piracy
The PirateBay has moved to the domain thepiratebay.gl in fear that their previous domain would be ceased by Swedish authorities
Intel 9 series chipset has native SATA Express (SATA over PCIe) support (2)
- Wed 17 Apr 13:57 by DoMiN8ToR
- Solid State (ssd)
A Chinese tech site has posted a picture that reveals details on Intel's 9 series chipset.
