OK --- a question of ethics

Discussion in 'Dell' started by MB_, Oct 11, 2005.

  1. MB_

    Leythos Guest

    I'm not, I actually agree with the EULA process and that people don't
    have any right/permission to use licensed software if they can't follow
    the EULA, even if they can't return it to the vendor.

    I just commented on a part of a thread based on the statement made in
    Leythos, Oct 21, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Wouldn't that require that the EULA be presented in a form that a buyer who
    doesn't specifically know how to look for it would find it? Like a page in
    the manual, or a separate sheet in the box, or a file that gets presented
    and can be printed during the installation process?
    I can't imagine a court requiring a user to know how to find and know how
    to read a EULA that's hidden in a fourth-level subdirectory on the CD and
    is in TeX format...

    Granted, that's rare these days, but still... I missed this requirement.

    Gerhard Fiedler, Oct 21, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. MB_

    Jim Higgins Guest

    You would be completely out of step with contract law and contact law
    precedents developed well before the first digital computer.
    Jim Higgins, Oct 21, 2005
  4. MB_

    Jim Higgins Guest

    Yes. And when was the last time you bought software and the EULA
    wasn't presented to you in one of those manners or other manner all
    but impossible to avoid?

    The mfgr who prints his EULA under one of the bottom flaps in the
    cardboard box the shrink wrapped software box ships in will be the
    mfgr who cannot get any court in the land - including the spaced out
    7th and 8th Federal circuits - to support his EULA.

    No court would require that. I said "deliberately avoids" above
    because it literally takes a deliberate effort to avoid seeing
    software EULAs. They are made very easy to find for a very good
    reason... namely that the EULA buried in a fourth-level subdirectory
    on the CD and in TeX format would not be enforceable unless it could
    be PROVEN the buyer had seen it.

    The law is required - by yet more law - to presume the buyer has seen
    an easy to find EULA, but when the EULA is hidden the plaintiff has
    acted in bad faith and bad faith is a major black mark against any
    plaintiff. In such a case absolutely irrefutable proof would be
    required that the buyer had read the EULA before violating it.
    If that ever did happen, I'd guess it's so rare now that no one can
    cite an example of a software product still being sold in that manner.

    I don't recall ever seeing software without the software agreement or
    EULA in plain sight and I built my first computer from a kit back when
    that's the only way you could have a personal computer.
    Jim Higgins, Oct 21, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.