4 ms·

That's not how EULAs work, so far the only decision about EULAs not being binding is when they prohibit you from reselling the software. Not when you agree that

by jdong 12y ago

That's not how EULAs work, so far the only decision about EULAs not being binding is when they prohibit you from reselling the software. Not when you agree that the other party is allowed to do something. These are two wildly different scenarios.

chimeracoder 12y ago
> That's not how EULAs work, so far the only decision about EULAs not being binding is when they prohibit you from reselling the software. I can write a EULA that requires you to sign over the rights to your firstborn child, your soul to the devil, and any other nonsense that I could come up with[0]. That doesn't mean that it's actually legally enforceable. Certain clauses have been deemed nonenforceable by law in contracts[1], so just because it's in the EULA doesn't mean it's valid. Also, just because it hasn't been deemed nonenforceable previously doesn't mean that it is valid either; it has to be tested (as with all law). That doesn't give a definitive answer either way, except to say that just because it's in the EULA doesn't mean it's permissible, either morally (subjective) or legally (objective, or at least "objective"). [0] http://www.out-law.com/page-10929 http://www.out-law.com/page-10929 [1] The ones that people on this site may be most familiar with are noncompetes and/or invention assignments (in certain states - these particular examples are actually more hazy than most people think, but that's a separate matter). Other extreme examples would be contracts that make a person the legal property of another person (e.g. in many/most countries, you cannot enter into "consensual slavery" with a legally binding contract).
- anonymousab 12y ago
  There's also the question of whether an unsigned post-purchase EULA constitutes a legally binding contract at all.
  - jdong 12y ago
    Courts have agreed on them being legally binding several times. https://ilt.eff.org/index.php/Contracts:_Click_Wrap_Licenses https://ilt.eff.org/index.php/Contracts:_Click_Wrap_Licenses When they haven't found them legally binding, they've generally either been simply ridiculous or deceiving.
    - bencoder 12y ago
      OP was saying in some other countries these clauses would not be legally binding, regardless. Your link only shows US court cases.
  - Argorak 12y ago
    This is a bit tricky, though! The Origin EULA is not necessarily post-purchase. It is, if you buy the disk, install the game and then click through. It ain't if you download Origin, install, accept the EULA and then buy a game. Still, it is questionable whether a contract that is rarely read and can be changed at whim is a contract in some legislations at all. This is still a HUGE open topic.
- jdong 12y ago
  Certain clauses will be unenforceable, obviously. But this isn't about enforcing, this is about you granting them permission to do something. After that you'll have really hard time in court trying to argue that they shouldn't have been doing it.
  - vertex-four 12y ago
    The point is that in many countries, you can't agree to give others permission to do certain things. The court will simply throw out any clauses which would try to permit these things. Even in the USA, you can't sell yourself into slavery for the rest of your life, as an example of a contract that might be invalid. Most other countries simply have more consumer rights which disallow even more forms of contract.
    - evilDagmar 12y ago
      So... tell us... when was the last time you looked at how student loans work?
Argorak 12y ago
Which decision in which legislation? This is highly contextual. In Europe, for example, contractual freedom with a consumer (not in between companies) is often highly regulated. And even then, it differs from country to country.
1ris 12y ago
In Germany, this is contract is very likely a violation of "established/good morals" ("Gute Sitten", https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gute_Sitten https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gute_Sitten ) and therefor null and void.

by jdong 12y ago

chimeracoder 12y ago

> That's not how EULAs work, so far the only decision about EULAs not being binding is when they prohibit you from reselling the software. I can write a EULA that requires you to sign over the rights to your firstborn child, your soul to the devil, and any other nonsense that I could come up with[0]. That doesn't mean that it's actually legally enforceable. Certain clauses have been deemed nonenforceable by law in contracts[1], so just because it's in the EULA doesn't mean it's valid. Also, just because it hasn't been deemed nonenforceable previously doesn't mean that it is valid either; it has to be tested (as with all law). That doesn't give a definitive answer either way, except to say that just because it's in the EULA doesn't mean it's permissible, either morally (subjective) or legally (objective, or at least "objective"). [0] http://www.out-law.com/page-10929 http://www.out-law.com/page-10929 [1] The ones that people on this site may be most familiar with are noncompetes and/or invention assignments (in certain states - these particular examples are actually more hazy than most people think, but that's a separate matter). Other extreme examples would be contracts that make a person the legal property of another person (e.g. in many/most countries, you cannot enter into "consensual slavery" with a legally binding contract).

anonymousab 12y ago
There's also the question of whether an unsigned post-purchase EULA constitutes a legally binding contract at all.
- jdong 12y ago
  Courts have agreed on them being legally binding several times. https://ilt.eff.org/index.php/Contracts:_Click_Wrap_Licenses https://ilt.eff.org/index.php/Contracts:_Click_Wrap_Licenses When they haven't found them legally binding, they've generally either been simply ridiculous or deceiving.
  - bencoder 12y ago
    OP was saying in some other countries these clauses would not be legally binding, regardless. Your link only shows US court cases.
- Argorak 12y ago
  This is a bit tricky, though! The Origin EULA is not necessarily post-purchase. It is, if you buy the disk, install the game and then click through. It ain't if you download Origin, install, accept the EULA and then buy a game. Still, it is questionable whether a contract that is rarely read and can be changed at whim is a contract in some legislations at all. This is still a HUGE open topic.
jdong 12y ago
Certain clauses will be unenforceable, obviously. But this isn't about enforcing, this is about you granting them permission to do something. After that you'll have really hard time in court trying to argue that they shouldn't have been doing it.
- vertex-four 12y ago
  The point is that in many countries, you can't agree to give others permission to do certain things. The court will simply throw out any clauses which would try to permit these things. Even in the USA, you can't sell yourself into slavery for the rest of your life, as an example of a contract that might be invalid. Most other countries simply have more consumer rights which disallow even more forms of contract.
  - evilDagmar 12y ago
    So... tell us... when was the last time you looked at how student loans work?

Argorak 12y ago

Which decision in which legislation? This is highly contextual. In Europe, for example, contractual freedom with a consumer (not in between companies) is often highly regulated. And even then, it differs from country to country.

1ris 12y ago

In Germany, this is contract is very likely a violation of "established/good morals" ("Gute Sitten", https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gute_Sitten https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gute_Sitten ) and therefor null and void.