OT: Software copyright law?

[Phoenix-D]

You'd probably have to break the copy protection to do so; DMCA again. Also a lot of the EULAs have clauses to the effect of "by using this software", and its arguable that you're using it.

I sort of doubt the ethicallity of those sort of clauses, but oh well. Much worse is the EULA itself, given that A. its a contract you have to accept to use something you already paid for, and B. if you don't accept it, most stores won't accept a return..

[Jack Simth]

Phoenix-D said:
You'd probably have to break the copy protection to do so; DMCA again.

Presuming, for the sake of argument, that no such copy-protection is in place; perhaps it's downloaded software for a MMORPG, a demo for some utility, software purchased online, or some such.

Phoenix-D said:Also a lot of the EULAs have clauses to the effect of "by using this software", and its arguable that you're using it.

Ah... so if I make up a user agreement for my EVIL(TM) router that basically says anything sent through this device becomes my intellectual property, and then go browse an art site, I can later sue the art site for distributing my intellectual property without my permission, (after all, in order to send the images to my browser, they first had to be sent through my EVIL(TM) router....) despite the fact that the art site had no way of knowing that my router was EVIL(TM), even though if you type the IP on my EVIL(TM) router into any functioning and connected web browser it returns a simple english text web page with the user agreement due to the nature of the EVIL(TM) routing software? No? How does the EVIL(TM) router useage agreement scenerio differ from not encountering the EULA of a piece of software, and still being bound?

Phoenix-D said:
I sort of doubt the ethicallity of those sort of clauses, but oh well. Much worse is the EULA itself, given that A. its a contract you have to accept to use something you already paid for, and B. if you don't accept it, most stores won't accept a return..

Oh, it gets better - there's usually a clause that says it's not fit for any particular purpose, while the advertising on the package says that it's great for all sorts of purposes - hmm.... how is "False Advertising" defined? Perhaps "Bait and Switch"? Don't have the recources, but it might just be interesting to test that in court at some point....

[Suicide Junkie]

Isn't there something about agreements made under duress?

A company holding my legally purchased property hostage sounds applicable.

PS: "Terrorism"
As national security advisor, I advise that these companies using EULAs be declared part of the "axis of evil" and bombed into the ground like the terrorists they are.

[Atrocities]

Actually they should by law disclose the agreements PRIOR to purchase. Have any of you tried to return software to the place of purchase? They simply will not take it back. In most cases they will only exchange it. Is that not a violation of some agreement somewhere. Seems to me that most software manufactures say that if you do not agree to the terms of use, that you can return the software for a refund. But if the stores will not refund your money.... they have broken the terms for the agreement.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Yeah, one person doesn't have the money to take a company to court, but a bunch of people do.

[Wolfman77]

And that answers the first question of which law would supersede the other in court: The one that has the most money protecting it.

[Atrocities]

99% of all of the funds won in 99% of all class action lawsuits that are won or are settled end up going the trial lawyers.

American General Finance was once sued for improperly figuring interest on loans. It cost me around $440.00 according to the lawsuit. AG settled for nearly a 100 million or so and when it was all said and done, and mind you there were only about 2,000 plaintiffs, I got a check for, and I kid you not, $0.27.