Be honest: Do you ever read EULAs? | Hacker News Reader

Be honest: Do you ever read EULAs?

thestandard.com

13 pointsilamont14 comments

No. I figure I can't be responsible for something I didn't read or sign and that probably isn't legally valid anyway, so why waste my time reading?

I hear my cat likes reading them, though. I never accepted the EULA on my Mac... but my cat did. Direct any legal inquiries to her.

I agree with what you mean but not what you say. If you sign a real contract without reading it you're still responsible. The only thing is that EULAs are pretty far from a real contract. And I doubt the cat argument would stand in court.

> And I doubt the cat argument would stand in court.

I wouldn't argue it that way in court. I would say "I popped in the install CD, I went away, I came back and the software was working. If there was an EULA, I never agreed to it." Knowing how buggy software in general is, it would be easy to argue that a bug prevented the EULA from showing. The key is proving that I would have returned the software if I saw an EULA.

Not that anything like this would ever see the inside of a courtroom. EULAs only exist so that the corporate lawyers have something to entertain themselves during the litigation off season (if there is such a thing).

I don't think dishonesty is a responsible strategy. Better dismiss the legitimacy of the EULA than implicitly acknowledge its validity with your false assertions (if you argue that you didn't read it then you're saying it's relevant).

No. Once you read one, there is no need to read another, they are basically the same thing, only with slight alterations.

Indeed, most of them simply say you have no rights whatsoever. In 30 sections.

I have never once read a EULA - I don't really see how you could make it all the way through one and stay away.

How important is the EULA/Terms and conditions that you always have to click OK to when you register to use a new web app? If I was to release an app without legally prepared terms and conditions would that be a stupid thing to do?

Why bother: if you don't agree, you can't use the software. Kinda pointless if you just bought it. Now if you could read them before hand to see if you actually agree, I'm sure you wouldn't buy it/use it.

I read the GPL (v.2) once or twice and that covers enough software that I can skip (re)reading the license on most free stuff. That's the beauty of standard terms for the end user at least.

The GPL isn't a EULA. It is a document that gives you additional rights if you happen to be a redistributor.

True enough, though it seems a fair amount of software will pop it up in the installation process and make you agree to it as if it were. This could be due to using plug and play installation software, though.

Maybe I should revise my original post to: go with GPL'd or similar software and an EULA isn't even an issue.

Always. It usually just takes a few seconds because I just skim over anything that I recognize as boilerplate. But every once in a while I reject one because it's downright scary. Worst offender I've ever seen is the Punkbuster EULA:

http://manual.americasarmy.com/index.php/I_agreed_to_the_Pun...

>Licensee also acknowledges and agrees that PunkBuster software is self-updating, which means that future updates will, from time to time and without any notice, automatically be downloaded and installed as a normal and expected function of PunkBuster software. Licensee further acknowledges and accepts that PunkBuster software may be considered invasive. Licensee understands that PunkBuster software inspects and reports information about the computer on which it is installed to other connected computers and Licensee agrees to allow PunkBuster software to inspect and report such information about the computer on which Licensee installs PunkBuster software.

Never. It's one of only two consistent policies: read every one carefully, or read none.

Reading every one carefully would be a tremendous waste of time. Many, perhaps all, contain clauses that I am legally unqualified to evaluate, and are probably unenforceable. (And no, I'm not hiring a lawyer to interpret each one for me, at a greater cost that that of the software itself.)

At least with a read-none policy, I will always be able to report, if it becomes a question in the future, that I'm sure I didn't read and agree to any one in particular.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com