How does your EULA suck?
Donna Wentworth has commented on several excerpts from a few end user license agreements that she thinks are no good. As software developers and customers, what do you think is the right balance?
4 Responses to “How does your EULA suck?”
How does your EULA suck?
Donna Wentworth has commented on several excerpts from a few end user license agreements that she thinks are no good. As software developers and customers, what do you think is the right balance?
4 Responses to “How does your EULA suck?”
-
ianmjones.net Says:
February 23rd, 2005 at 7:40 amDangerous Terms: A User’s Guide to EULAs
microISV.com has pointed out indirectly that Annalee Newitz has written a very interesting white paper as a “A User’s Guide to EULAs”, with Donna Wentworth commenting on some excerpts. If you have ever scanned through a End User License Agreement (w… -
matt Says:
February 23rd, 2005 at 9:29 amI’m not sure that you will get much support for articles like that out here. MicroISV’s have the most to lose from EULA legislation.
This article is the very definition of “FUD”.
-
Brian Says:
February 23rd, 2005 at 9:59 ammatt,
You may be right, and I didn’t post it looking for support, but its something that should be considered by every software publisher shouldn’t it?My feeling is that you’ll still get sued, in the US at least, if your software causes a business significant damage even if you have it in your EULA absolving you of responsibility. If you win the case you won’t have to pay damages, but your microISV business may not survive.
-
Ian S Says:
March 10th, 2005 at 4:57 pmI think the article brings up good points. As a microisv it is certainly in your interests to protect yourself from expensive litigation, but some of these clauses are just outright bad for business. Don’t benchmark your product? Says who? I might be charged for renewed subscription even if I cancel? Etc..
These type of ridiculous clauses must not be ignored, they make all EULAs, which may have good purposes, look bad. If the word gets out to the general public that EULAs are a bad thing(tm), such as how they’ve been addressed by the OSS community, then we’re all going to suffer in consumer confidence, which IMO is at an all time low when it comes to software.
February 23rd, 2005 at 7:40 am
Dangerous Terms: A User’s Guide to EULAs
microISV.com has pointed out indirectly that Annalee Newitz has written a very interesting white paper as a “A User’s Guide to EULAs”, with Donna Wentworth commenting on some excerpts. If you have ever scanned through a End User License Agreement (w…
February 23rd, 2005 at 9:29 am
I’m not sure that you will get much support for articles like that out here. MicroISV’s have the most to lose from EULA legislation.
This article is the very definition of “FUD”.
February 23rd, 2005 at 9:59 am
matt,
You may be right, and I didn’t post it looking for support, but its something that should be considered by every software publisher shouldn’t it?
My feeling is that you’ll still get sued, in the US at least, if your software causes a business significant damage even if you have it in your EULA absolving you of responsibility. If you win the case you won’t have to pay damages, but your microISV business may not survive.
March 10th, 2005 at 4:57 pm
I think the article brings up good points. As a microisv it is certainly in your interests to protect yourself from expensive litigation, but some of these clauses are just outright bad for business. Don’t benchmark your product? Says who? I might be charged for renewed subscription even if I cancel? Etc..
These type of ridiculous clauses must not be ignored, they make all EULAs, which may have good purposes, look bad. If the word gets out to the general public that EULAs are a bad thing(tm), such as how they’ve been addressed by the OSS community, then we’re all going to suffer in consumer confidence, which IMO is at an all time low when it comes to software.