Re:That’s a EULA

November 10th, 2009 by rlaager

Mirrored from Slashdot:

And remember, EULAs are not enforceable. Slashdot screams this EVERY time APPLE or MS has one. It cuts both ways, Slashdot. — Anonymous

The GPL explicitly says you don’t have to agree to it to use the software. It only comes into play when you distribute copies of the software, which is something unambiguously covered by copyright law everywhere. The majority of people here arguing that argue EULAs are invalid are not suggesting that they should be able to *distribute copies* of Mac OS X or Windows.

They’re saying you can’t have a transaction that looks like a sale in every way, but when you open the box, it says you have to agree to another contract (that you can’t negotiate or change) which says that your transaction was not a sale and that you agree to all sorts of draconian conditions. Plus, EULAs often purport to apply in such a way that you have to agree to the agreement before you see it. Imagine you buy a car, but the car’s key is inside a box with tape that says, “If you break this tape, you agree to be bound by the agreement within.” The agreement inside the box says you didn’t actually buy the car, you’re just leasing it and thus you’re not allowed to figure out how the car works, so you must bring it into the dealership for work. This is what (the majority of, as there are always some crazy folks) the “EULAs are not enforceable” comments are about.
Read more…

Posted in Computers | No Comments »