Originally Posted by Gorman
3) They are not in any way legally binding, at best a producer can say "well we did have it in the EULA, it was on page 42".
Yes they are. Don't whinge about shit you don't know about.
Originally Posted by Gorman
4) With 2 and 3, since no one reads them (and everyone knows this), and they aren't legally binding, there is no legal grounds to use them as evidence in a court; that is, you can't say "the plantif should know because it was in the EULA" since it is not reasonable to assume they have read it.
One of the conditions of the EULA is that you agree that you have read it. If you accept the EULA then that's that. You're locked in. A EULA is a legally binding contract. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Originally Posted by Gorman
6) Oh, and there is usually no 'alternative'. For example, if I declined the App store agreement, then what am I going to do? Then I have an iDevice that I can't put new apps on to. Great. I really doubt that the person I bought my iDevice from would give me a refund because of this. I may try it some time though...
And why on earth should there be an alternative? It's their product.
To determine whether a contract is legally binding or not, the courts take 3 main factors into account.
1) Intention of the contract to be legally binding.
Even if it's not a professionally written contract, so long as there is intention for the contract to be legally binding, it is.
2) Offer and acceptance.
Basically, you accept the offer they give you. There's no need to go indepth in this one.
3) Consideration.
Alternate factors that influence the conditions of the contract. Like if you were at gunpoint. Stuff like that.
Originally Posted by Gorman
So in closing, if they can't be used in a legal sense
They are.
Originally Posted by Gorman
, and they are not read by consumers,
It's expected they do.
Originally Posted by Gorman
what the hell is the point of them? Just to wave away complaints by unwitting users?
To free themselves of litigation.
Source; 1 year of Tort Law study.
Shut the fuck up Todd.
You do know that there is something called a Standard form contract? Basically because you have no chance to renegotiate the contract it can, and has in the past, been considered invalid. EULA's have also in the past been considered unconscionable. I would expect someone who has even a basic understanding on contract law to know these fairly basic concepts.
Death awaits me...
Originally Posted by avwave
wait till you see apple's developer licence agreement
you could use it as a doorstop
Yeah, I didn't read that either.
i have a totally post modern tattoo of a scalene triangle.
<DeadorK> fair maiden<DeadorK> if the cum is going to be in your mouth
<DeadorK> it shall be in mine as well
Originally Posted by Yagamai
lots of words
I wrote a nice response to you, but the forum went down or something.
So anyway, let me sum it up; there needs to be reasonable expectation that the party not only read, but understood the terms.
Which is why mentally disabled, under-aged people, illiterate, are not held accountable for their actions in this regard.
Not sure what country you come from where you can get a 12 year old, deaf, dumb, dyslexic, downs syndrome person to press the [Accept] button, and assume that it is legally binding.
When I see you, my heart goes DOKI⑨DOKI
Fish: "Gorman has been chosen for admin. After a lengthy discussion we've all decided that Gorman is the best choice for the next admin."
