how-to block ads
|
Uniqs:
170 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 Jim_in_VA
join:2004-07-11
Cobbs Creek, VA
kudos:3 | Definition of " EULA" For those wondering what EULA is:
End Users License Agreement
You get the screen every time you install licensed software. | |
|  | | Re: Definition of " EULA" So Blizzard is now a Law Enforcement Agency? I can search people, but only on duty and on base. If I did that as a civilian I'd have to arrest myself,....
That analogy doesn't stand up. Privacy trumps possible cheating in an online game. Blizzard should be sued. | |
| | FrohikePremium
join:2000-07-23
Waxahachie, TX
kudos:4 | Re: Definition of " EULA" said by armyguy :
So Blizzard is now a Law Enforcement Agency? I can search people, but only on duty and on base. If I did that as a civilian I'd have to arrest myself,....
That analogy doesn't stand up. Privacy trumps possible cheating in an online game. Blizzard should be sued.
LOL, should be sued. When you agree to the EULA, you release yourself of any lawsuit. I don't agree with the analogy either, but the lawsuit would be thrown out and the Suer would be charged with having to pay all court fees, including Blizzard's. Any lawyer with half a brain would not let it get that far anyways once he read the EULA.
His advice....to /cancel and move on. | |
| | |  MacWin
join:2003-06-26
Imperial, MO | Re: Definition of " EULA" Is this only on the Windows version ? | |
| | | | FrohikePremium
join:2000-07-23
Waxahachie, TX
kudos:4 | Re: Definition of " EULA" I would assume its with MAC too, otherwise, all the cheaters would flock to the MAC. Its probably with any OS that can run WOW. | |
|
|  Vengarr
join:2001-11-05
Louisville, KY | So you can search people while on duty and on base. People know they can be searched at ANYTIME on a military base, so therefore they accept that. If you agree to play their game, you agree to their rules. Exactly the same as a bar or club or movie theater can require you be searched before being granted access to the property, so you cannot endanger the safety or ruin the good times of other participants.
This is exactly the same thing. Don't like the rules of a game, or club or business, stop participating and make your own. You are not required to use or buy the software, you made the choice to buy it.
You don't like the rules put in place and want to ignore them, or say you didn't know. Ignorance of the law is not a defense, same goes for a contract, you signed it and then got taken to the cleaners? Not our fault you didn't read it, or have a lawyer go over it to clarify it better.
If you agree to something and then change your mind later there are ramifications for that decision. | |
| | | | | Re: Definition of " EULA" I have to disagree with the philosophy of 'if you don't like it you don't have to buy it'. By clicking on the EULA you are giving up your rights? That is patently false.
By your definition, I could hand someone an EULA that would let me charge them for sex, and if they signed it, or clicked it, they would give up the right to sue me. Unfortunately, you can't sign away rights. That's well defined case law.
How is an EULA any different? It's not really. You cannot 'click away rights' just because an EULA says you don't have the right. In fact, and EULA is far LESS enforceable than a signed contract, and contract law is very specific about what you can and cannot do. It just hasn't been brought to court yet, so it's not defined. In the end, I suspect that Blizzard, even though it's to their detriment, could be classified as spyware, and they should be punished accordingly. The spyware companys have click through EULA's, but I don't see anyone jumping to support them, why is Blizzard any different than a spyware company? It's monitoring your computer, with only a click through consent, which 99.99% of all users can't understand or agree with if them knew.
--
Grand Poobah | |
| | | |  DaDogsSemper VigilantisPremium
join:2004-02-28
Deltaville, VA
1 edit | Re: Definition of " EULA" said by G_Poobah:I have to disagree with the philosophy of 'if you don't like it you don't have to buy it'. By clicking on the EULA you are giving up your rights? That is patently false. If that was false the "Click Thru" EULA would have been dead long ago. It isn't.
said by G_Poobah:By your definition, I could hand someone an EULA that would let me charge them for sex, and if they signed it, or clicked it, they would give up the right to sue me. Prostitution ... There is no EULA with prostitution but EVERYONE knows that when engaging in prostitution or pandering they pay their money and they take whatever they get... diseases and all. 
said by G_Poobah: Unfortunately, you can't sign away rights. That's well defined case law. ... on the other hand you can give someone permission collect information ... without "giving up your rights"
said by G_Poobah:How is an EULA any different? It's not really. Yes it REALLY is...
said by G_Poobah: You cannot 'click away rights' just because an EULA says you don't have the right. The EULA doesn't say "You don't have the right.". The EULA says, "You yeild to us the right to ..." Big difference.
said by G_Poobah: In fact, and EULA is far LESS enforceable than a signed contract, and contract law is very specific about what you can and cannot do. But you see a EULA is not a contract. If a EULA was a contract it would be called a contract. It is called an "End User License Agreement" for a reason. It is a "LICENSE AGREEMENT". You agree to use their product under their terms or to not use their product. Not complicated.
said by G_Poobah: It just hasn't been brought to court yet Undoubtedly it has by this very late date been tested in court repeatedly. Google IS your friend.
said by G_Poobah:, so it's not defined. In the end, I suspect that Blizzard, even though it's to their detriment, could be classified as spyware, and they should be punished accordingly. The spyware companys have click through EULA's, but I don't see anyone jumping to support them, why is Blizzard any different than a spyware company? It's monitoring your computer, with only a click through consent, which 99.99% of all users can't understand or agree with if them knew. It is obvious that the function of the one is nothing like the function of the other.
--
How can I improve my WiFi signal? | |
| | | | | | | Re: Definition of " EULA" "If that was false the "Click Thru" EULA would have been dead long ago. It isn't."
That's because the legislature hasn't updated the laws on them yet. I point you to »www.benedelman.org/spyware/legislation/ and you can see what the state (not federal yet, just state) laws read in regards to click through software. "Prohibits inducing a user to install software by intentionally misrepresenting that installing software is necessary for security or privacy, or to open or play content"
Granted, I don't disagree with Blizzard. But I also don't agree that when I purchased the game, I gave blizzard the right to look at other processes running on my machine. THAT's the big problem I have with these programs, since it substancially changes what I purchased, AFTER I purchased it. I could argue that today, the software is worthless to me, since they unilatally changed what they sold me. It's no different than Apple with Itunes, changing the terms of the agreement on the fly. If they have the right to change the terms, then even now, 9 months later, I have a right to demand a full refund of the game, since they have substancially changed what I purchased. What I purchased did NOT include spyware, monitoring my PC. That was not advertised clearly on the box, that was not displayed in the ORIGINAL EULA. That did not exist. Today, it does exist. If they have that as a term of the agreement, find, but then I demand 100% refund of the oringal purchase price. Or I demand that they can't change the terms.
Under a world where someone can change the terms of use AFTER you purchase it, what's to stop Ford and Exxon from coming up with an EULA that says 'You can only use Exxon gas in your ford car, and we will monitor you, and if we find you used Mobil, your warranty is void'. Would anyone stand for that? Absolutely not. Would you buy a ford car if that was the rule? Probably not. Would you be pissed if they instituted it today, and all existing ford cars were subject to their new 'agreement'? sure you would, and you'd sue. The only reason noone has SUED over this change by blizzard, is that it's expensive to take on a big company. The individual has almost zero chance to win agaist a corporation.
--
Grand Poobah | |
| | | | | | DaDogsSemper VigilantisPremium
join:2004-02-28
Deltaville, VA | Re: Definition of " EULA" said by G_Poobah:"If that was false the "Click Thru" EULA would have been dead long ago. It isn't." That's because the legislature hasn't updated the laws on them yet. I point you to » www.benedelman.org/spyware/legislation/ and you can see what the state (not federal yet, just state) laws read in regards to click through software. "Prohibits inducing a user to install software by intentionally misrepresenting that installing software is necessary for security or privacy, or to open or play content" Ahem. Read it yourself. I've added bolding so that you can focus upon the pertinent passage you so convienently quote. It says you can not INDUCE a user to INSTALL software by MISREPRESENTING that ...
It says you CANT LIE in a EULA.
said by G_Poobah:Granted, I don't disagree with Blizzard. But I also don't agree that when I purchased the game, I gave blizzard the right to look at other processes running on my machine. No you did that when you READ the EULA and clicked thru in AGREEMENT to it's constraints.
said by G_Poobah: THAT's the big problem I have with these programs, since it substancially changes what I purchased, AFTER I purchased it. I could argue that today, the software is worthless to me, since they unilatally changed what they sold me. Get your money back. Refuse to use the software and tell them that you have READ the EULA and you feel it is too constrictive and therefore you want your money back.
said by G_Poobah: It's no different than Apple with Itunes, changing the terms of the agreement on the fly. If they have the right to change the terms, then even now, 9 months later, I have a right to demand a full refund of the game, since they have substancially changed what I purchased. What I purchased did NOT include spyware, monitoring my PC. READ the EULA.
said by G_Poobah: That was not advertised clearly on the box, that was not displayed in the ORIGINAL EULA. We are not discussing APPLE here, we are discussing Blizzard. I am not current on the APPLE issue and this thread is not about the Apple issue.
said by G_Poobah: That did not exist. Today, it does exist. If they have that as a term of the agreement, find, but then I demand 100% refund of the oringal purchase price. Or I demand that they can't change the terms. Tell it to Apple. We are talking about Blizzard and whether or not you got a EULA which explained what they were doing.
F O C U S please.
said by G_Poobah:Under a world where someone can change the terms of use AFTER you purchase it, what's to stop Ford and Exxon from coming up with an EULA that says 'You can only use Exxon gas in your ford car, and we will monitor you, and if we find you used Mobil, your warranty is void'. Would anyone stand for that? Absolutely not. Would you buy a ford car if that was the rule? Probably not. Would you be pissed if they instituted it today, and all existing ford cars were subject to their new 'agreement'? sure you would, and you'd sue. The only reason noone has SUED over this change by blizzard, is that it's expensive to take on a big company. The individual has almost zero chance to win agaist a corporation. The reason that nobody has sued because of this change by Blizzard is that when the change occured, so did the EULA. The folks who patched to this change no doubt also clicked thru a EULA. Poobah, nobody has sued because nobody is going to win that suit.
But hey, whatever floats your boat, sue their asses off.
--
How can I improve my WiFi signal? | |
|
| |
|
