I think the biggest reason that nobody reads these is because of the sheer size of EULA documents. They're dense paragraphs upon paragraphs of legal text. I don't think that it's the legalese that scares people away, but the fact that page numbers in the double digits is the norm.

I've found that reading and understanding is not particularly difficult, but when I install iTunes/Windows/whatnot, it's because I want to use that software. I'm sure a lot of people agree that they don't want to spend twenty, thirty minutes reading through a license that says approximately the same thing every other EULA has said before.

A shortened summary in plain English (or language of your choice, I suppose) would be best, but as the article points out, that would open them up to all of the legal holes that those 56 pages were busy closing. Creative Commons' "human-readable" licenses (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/, compared to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode) are a good idea and one that I support, but as far as I know they haven't been tested in court, which makes it difficult for a company with large amounts of money at stake to embrace that.