Dealing with stupid EULAs: "You hereby grant us a license to print money"

[Erik Mesoy]

This is a tip I got from a friend that gave me immense peace of mind when dealing with mind-bogglingly long and stupid EULAs: Compare the major bits with a clause saying "You hereby grant us a license to print money". Said clause would have no validity and would not change the meaning of the EULA at all. Shrug and ignore it, then check whether the EULA's actual words are also crap that gets overridden by the law.

What sort of "print money" clauses have you seen?

The most common I've seen tend to be the SHOUTY ones saying something like "WE HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTY AND LIABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY, AND DENY THAT OUR PRODUCT IS GOOD FOR ANYTHING, AND REQUIRE YOU TO DO DIDDLY-SQUAT IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM, EVEN IF IT'S CLEARLY OUR FAULT AND WE PROMISED IT WASN'T GOING TO HAPPEN AND IT RUINED YOUR LIFE." Except with more legalese, of course.

This doesn't apply where I live. I doubt it applies anywhere outside of the libertarian paradise of Somalia. Most other countries probably have consumer protection laws that set minimum liability or the like.

 

[Lone Wolf]

I like the "By agreeing to use our product, you agree to us kidnapping your firstborn and sacrificing him to Quetzalcoatl" clause.

 

[cardgame]

iTunes and nukes is a funny one.

 

[Formaldehyde]

You can thank Microsoft for all that. Before they came along and rewrote the rules, software vendors were actually held liable for the quality of their products.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

I like the "By agreeing to use our product, you agree to us kidnapping your firstborn and sacrificing him to Quetzalcoatl" clause.

...is that real? Where the bleep did you see that?

 

[cardgame]

http://www.illegal-art.org/contract.html
EULA nobody was supposed to read I guess

 

[Lone Wolf]

...is that real? Where the bleep did you see that?

Of course not.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

Of course not.

I intended this thread for real examples. Here's a shouty one from TeamSpeak that follows the general pattern I mentioned.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ON AN "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE WARRANTIES THAT IT IS FREE OF DEFECTS, VIRUS FREE, ABLE TO OPERATE ON AN UNINTERRUPTED BASIS, MERCHANTABLE, FIT FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR NON-INFRINGING. THIS DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTY CONSTITUTES AN ESSENTIAL PART OF THIS LICENSE AND AGREEMENT. NO USE OF THE SOFTWARE IS AUTHORIZED HEREUNDER EXCEPT UNDER THIS DISCLAIMER.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Remarkable clauses in WinXP's EULA here.

 

[illram]

To the extent permitted by law, LICENSEE agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold LICENSOR, its officers, directors, employees, agents, subcontractors, licensors, successors, and assigns harmless from and against any and all liability, losses, claims, expenses (including attorney fees), demands, or damages of any kind, including direct, indirect, special, punitive, incidental, or consequential damages, arising out of or in any way connected with LICENSEE’s use, or from any use by others of the Software, Web Services, and Data permitted by LICENSEE, and regardless of any active and/or passive negligence on the part of LICENSOR, except in claims arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of LICENSOR and their agents or employees. Delivery of the Software, Web Services, and Data does not constitute a waiver of the rights and obligations set forth in this Article.

As a general rule, if you want to see the part of the contract that really screws you, find the indemnity section.

 

[emzie]

To prove that point, PC Pitstop included a clause in one of its own EULAs that promised anyone who read it, a "consideration" including money if they sent a note to an email address listed in the EULA. After four months and more than 3,000 downloads, one person finally wrote in. That person, by the way, got a check for $1,000 proving, at least for one person, that it really does pay to read EULAs.

http://www.pcpitstop.com/spycheck/eula.asp

 

[Phlegmak]

This is a tip I got from a friend that gave me immense peace of mind when dealing with mind-bogglingly long and stupid EULAs: Compare the major bits with a clause saying "You hereby grant us a license to print money". Said clause would have no validity and would not change the meaning of the EULA at all. Shrug and ignore it, then check whether the EULA's actual words are also crap that gets overridden by the law.

What sort of "print money" clauses have you seen?

The most common I've seen tend to be the SHOUTY ones saying something like "WE HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTY AND LIABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY, AND DENY THAT OUR PRODUCT IS GOOD FOR ANYTHING, AND REQUIRE YOU TO DO DIDDLY-SQUAT IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM, EVEN IF IT'S CLEARLY OUR FAULT AND WE PROMISED IT WASN'T GOING TO HAPPEN AND IT RUINED YOUR LIFE." Except with more legalese, of course.

This doesn't apply where I live. I doubt it applies anywhere outside of the libertarian paradise of Somalia. Most other countries probably have consumer protection laws that set minimum liability or the like.

By this "print money" comparison, you mean you are making an analogy of giving the licenser the ability to do something you had no capabiility of giving him? Like "You hereby grant us a license to turn off the sun"?

On the topic of EULAs, Apple once had one that said, "You may not use this product to make biological weapons."

 

[Erik Mesoy]

By this "print money" comparison, you mean you are making an analogy of giving the licenser the ability to do something you had no capabiility of giving him?

For instance, but it's more generally about clauses that can be freely ignored because they're overridden by law, so you don't have to care much what you're signing because it's invalid.

A similar thing that happens in Norway fairly often is when manufacturers try to sell you stuff that comes with a 90-day warranty. You can agree all you like that you only get a 90-day warranty and it's irrelevant, as Norwegian law specifies that minimum warranty time on most stuff is two years. (For some items, such as cars, five years.) This minimum warranty time cannot be signed away as a matter of law.

 

[GoodGame]

I intended this thread for real examples. Here's a shouty one from TeamSpeak that follows the general pattern I mentioned.

It's just Caveat Emptor overly explained.

 

[amadeus]

You can thank Microsoft for all that. Before they came along and rewrote the rules, software vendors were actually held liable for the quality of their products.

I tend to think software is a lot better today than what it was 20 years ago...

 

[RalofTyr]

I just have a legally mentally ******** person buy and install my computer equipment. Then, if there's a problem, sorry Microsoft, a legally mentally ******** person can't enter into a contract so your EULA is null and void and he can sue the pants off of you.

 

[Defiant47]

The most problematic part of any EULA (and the reason I stopped using MSN Messenger) is the clause that they can change it at any time and you are automatically agreeing to it. So they could change it to "by use of this software, you relinquish all of your assets to our company" and you automatically agree.

 

[emzie]

The most problematic part of any EULA (and the reason I stopped using MSN Messenger) is the clause that they can change it at any time and you are automatically agreeing to it. So they could change it to "by use of this software, you relinquish all of your assets to our company" and you automatically agree.

Which would never hold up in court when the EULA-issuing company tried to take yours.

 

[Phlegmak]

Nevermind. Ignore this.

 

[really]

EULAs aren't really worth much in court. General Sale of Goods and Supply of Services laws supersede their clauses.

Edit: unless you hire someone to write something specific for you - that is different.