This is why modern day EULAs should be illegal

[RogueLikely]

Every digital product you "purchase" makes you agree to a "End User License Agreement". Every single one of these EULA are so anti-consumer that it gives the company what amounts to complete control over a product you payed for. The fact is none of us actually own anything on our computers, and at any time a company can make something you payed for no longer work. And there's nothing you can do about it because you technically "agreed" to it.

There honestly should be laws preventing companies from adding content to their software that would prevent an end user, running it locally from a device they own, from using or modifying it in any way they please.

[Backstabba]

Most EULAs are illegal which is why they aren't enforceable and inadmissible in court.

An example is all of the "We own everything you make in X"(Like what Blizzard tried to pull in Warcraft 3's rerelease) EULAs which break numerous laws including nearly ever labor law in the world.

Most people just don't sue over them because its a massive waste of money most of the time unless its something like a class action lawsuit.

TLDR: EULA's are mainly a deterrent and for non court issues like bans.

[Amaterasu]

I mean, the problem is far more deeply rooted than the EULA... but one shouldn't have to be forced to accept it to play the product. I don't know anyone other than me who has actively ever read through the entirety of one and... it made me not want to go into law, it was so dreadfully boring.

[Chippawaffen]

Well next time you pay for a new game refuse to accept the terms and conditions that you never read.

[Amaterasu]

Originally posted by Backstabba:

Most EULAs are illegal which is why they aren't enforceable and inadmissible in court.

An example is all of the "We own everything you make in X"(Like what Blizzard tried to pull in Warcraft 3's rerelease) EULAs which break numerous laws including nearly ever labor law in the world.

Most people just don't sue over them because its a massive waste of money most of the time unless its something like a class action lawsuit.

TLDR: EULA's are mainly a deterrent and for non court issues like bans.

it's also more that corpos have armies of lawyers that are not afraid to drag it out for as long as it takes for you to fold through bankruptcy.

[RogueLikely]

Originally posted by Backstabba:

Most EULAs are illegal which is why they aren't enforceable and inadmissible in court.

An example is all of the "We own everything you make in X"(Like what Blizzard tried to pull in Warcraft 3's rerelease) EULAs which break numerous laws including nearly ever labor law in the world.

Most people just don't sue over them because its a massive waste of money most of the time unless its something like a class action lawsuit.

TLDR: EULA's are mainly a deterrent and for non court issues like bans.

That actually is interesting information. I guess I'd then like to know how DRM like Enigma is legal in the first place. It seems like a company is dictating how you use a product you legally own, by deliberately adding code designed to render it useless should you perform frivolous actions they dislike.

It would be like buying a car that has a secret microphone installed in it that would render the vehicle inoperable if you cursed while driving it. I'm sure imposing such stipulations would be illegal, yet doing what amounts to the same thing with a piece of software is standard practice.

[JPM岩]

Originally posted by RogueLikely:

Originally posted by Backstabba:

Most EULAs are illegal which is why they aren't enforceable and inadmissible in court.

An example is all of the "We own everything you make in X"(Like what Blizzard tried to pull in Warcraft 3's rerelease) EULAs which break numerous laws including nearly ever labor law in the world.

Most people just don't sue over them because its a massive waste of money most of the time unless its something like a class action lawsuit.

TLDR: EULA's are mainly a deterrent and for non court issues like bans.

That actually is interesting information. I guess I'd then like to know how DRM like Enigma is legal in the first place. It seems like a company is dictating how you use a product you legally own, by deliberately adding code designed to render it useless should you perform frivolous actions they dislike.

It would be like buying a car that has a secret microphone installed in it that would render the vehicle inoperable if you cursed while driving it. I'm sure imposing such stipulations would be illegal, yet doing what amounts to the same thing with a piece of software is standard practice.

Companies can legally sue someone for using a product incorrectly. An example would be like, a Tickle Me Elmo being used as, let's say a bong in a music video. Disney could legally sue the creator of said music video for tarnishing the image of one of their IPs, Elmo of Sesame Street. But then it falls into "how much is this really worth for the hassle".
In the case you mentioned, it would be illegal, not because of the secret microphone, but because the car would suddenly stop, and be an extreme safety hazard that would endanger others.
Unfortunately, the world is run by old people who reject the idea of new technology. They dont understand it, so therefore it's bad. It's a huge issue in Japan especially, because none of the people in power understand how the new age works, restricting it, and causing the mass depression Japan is going through. The only way to stop practices like this is pulling the weed out by the roots.

[RogueLikely]

Originally posted by JPM岩:

Originally posted by RogueLikely:

That actually is interesting information. I guess I'd then like to know how DRM like Enigma is legal in the first place. It seems like a company is dictating how you use a product you legally own, by deliberately adding code designed to render it useless should you perform frivolous actions they dislike.

It would be like buying a car that has a secret microphone installed in it that would render the vehicle inoperable if you cursed while driving it. I'm sure imposing such stipulations would be illegal, yet doing what amounts to the same thing with a piece of software is standard practice.

Companies can legally sue someone for using a product incorrectly. An example would be like, a Tickle Me Elmo being used as, let's say a bong in a music video. Disney could legally sue the creator of said music video for tarnishing the image of one of their IPs, Elmo of Sesame Street. But then it falls into "how much is this really worth for the hassle".
In the case you mentioned, it would be illegal, not because of the secret microphone, but because the car would suddenly stop, and be an extreme safety hazard that would endanger others.
Unfortunately, the world is run by old people who reject the idea of new technology. They dont understand it, so therefore it's bad. It's a huge issue in Japan especially, because none of the people in power understand how the new age works, restricting it, and causing the mass depression Japan is going through. The only way to stop practices like this is pulling the weed out by the roots.

I guess a better example would be if the car always had the microphone in it, but the company pushed an update that suddenly made it stop working should you do something arbitrary like cursing while inside it. Changing the fundamental utility of a product for the consumer post purchase, even if it was buried in a EULA somewhere, shouldn't be legal.

[Sifer2]

The issue is much larger than the EULA's themselves. Which were already ruled none binding in the EU if they conflict with any existing consumer protection laws. The real issue is that there is now a very large push to have all forms of media be offered digitally only. And through subscription services only. In this way you as a consumer pretty much have no option's or control at all other than to cancel your subscription if you no longer care for the service. This applies to Steam games as well since technically they have always been subscriptions with no expiration date.

The only way out of this cage that's being built would be if consumers got together to form a big bloc to push for some new digital consumer rights laws. Since something tells me today's government representatives, and corporations are definitely not going to do it for us.

[Smile`]

EULA is necessary because we live in the United States of Lawsuits, Liabilities and Litigations. Its all legal mumbo-jumbo and safeguarding their assets.

[SMM Emperor Lucifer]

Originally posted by RogueLikely:

Changing the fundamental utility of a product for the consumer post purchase, even if it was buried in a EULA somewhere, shouldn't be legal.

I spent extra to get my 3D monitor with 3D glasses and the 3D emitter. Nvidia rolled out an update to disable them. I spent a couple hundred on my WMR VR headset, and Microsoft is rolling out an update later this year to disable all of those.