Slashdot Log In
The Self-Modifying EULA?
Posted by
Cliff
on Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:08 PM
from the stuff-to-think-about dept.
from the stuff-to-think-about dept.
An anonymous reader asks: "Years ago, when I first installed Windows 2000, I accepted its EULA. Despite serious defects in the product, I resisted installing Service Packs because they modify the original EULA. Now even Homeland Security is on my back to upgrade and install a fix. I would be happy to install SP4 and all the security patches BUT ONLY IF IT IS DONE UNDER THE ORIGINAL EULA. Otherwise, Microsoft has made me an unwilling zombie. The clear fact is that Microsoft delivered a defective product- should not allow them to redefine our agreement. I cannot think of any other market that successfully browbeats its customers in this manner. Can this be legal? Has it been tested in court?"
Related Stories
[+]
IT: Homeland Security says 'Patch Windows Now' 381 comments
gregger writes "Wow, so the Department of Homeland Security is really concerned with Microsoft patches now... enough to come out and tell us to patch our machines. This warning, chronicled in eWeek, was issued less than a day after the release of 23 patches from Redmond. So, if you don't apply the patches, then what?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Is it possible (Score:5, Insightful)
Then again, you could always just not accept the EULA and not install it... despite what DHS says. That's why there's another option to select.
Re:Is it possible (Score:5, Interesting)
EXACTLY!
just look at the unreasonable crap they cram into EULAs.
When companies tried this in the old days american workers were willing to stand up and strike, even in the face of direct threat to their familie's lives [wikipedia.org]
This generation is one of mindlessness, cowardice, and greed.
This is because of the way our schools and news are used to bombard us as citizens and our children, to teach us to be "good little consumers", to teach us that anyone who questions what the news outlets say is a "tinfoil hatted nut-job", and to persuade us not to act on the mountain of evidence that a wealthy few are impeding and keeping down the lower 95% of us by pounding in this false message that "you too can become rich if you work hard and play by our rules"....bullshit. The people whom these eula's represent are above the laws, they write the damn laws, and they write them with the specic aim of making sure they never have to share their power or money with we the peeons.
Re:Is it possible (Score:3, Interesting)
I think part of the problem is that
Re:Is it possible (Score:3, Funny)
That's exactly why almost no one has heard of this
Re:Is it possible (Score:3, Insightful)
Always keep a few voiciferous opponents around - it prevents the merely d
Re:Is it possible (Score:3, Interesting)
If, on the other hand, you have a belief set where you think you do have
Re:Is it possible (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure, there's a bit of smoke. I don't deny that. But there has pretty much always been smoke since the founding of the Republic. The US doesn't have a magic anti-authoritarian screen that prevent such people from being born or
Hey! (Score:3, Funny)
I became rich by playing by their rules you insensitive clod!
-Rick (Just kidding!!)
Re:Is it possible (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not sure if you were trying to be funny, just being a jackass, or really ar
Re:Is it possible (Score:3, Informative)
Err, Billg and co owe more to implementing BASIC on every late-1970s platform, ever, and later selling a CP/M clone to IBM and then to every reverse-engineered-PC-BIOS firm in the world, than they do to any of Xerox's crown jewels pinched from PARC.
It wa
Re:Is it possible (Score:3, Informative)
while (!dead()) {
work_8_to_7();
if (total_hours_worked_this_week() > 40) hourly_rate=0;
}
Re:Is it possible (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is it possible (Score:3, Insightful)
"When I have trouble finding a job without a last-minute "agreement" that claims they own everything I think of, even outside of work, and it kills my ability to work on my business or to better myself due to ownership issues, there is a problem"
This is
Re:Is it possible (Score:3, Interesting)
Good on you for having the guts to do that. An excessive of available accommodation probably helped your position. Sadly, vacant tenancy
Interesting... (Score:5, Interesting)
-b
Re:Interesting... (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft Backs Down on Windows 2000 EULA
"After the fiasco surrounding the overly intrusive EULA for Windows 2000 SP3, it seems Microsoft has backed down a bit with the upcoming release of SP4. The se
Re:Interesting... (Score:3, Insightful)
The good news is that I'm pretty sure that the new EULA is legally unenforceable. It's a well-estab
Ugggg..... Read the homeland security website (Score:5, Informative)
Well there not really on your back to install the fix. It's just the simplest solution for the vast majority of people. If you are not the vast majority read the freaking website on how to plug up the holes. The DHS does in fact post more than one way to ensure you computer is secure but closing up the holes. Of course with the number of holes you will be bashing your head up against the wall. It depends on your stuberness. Here is an interesting question though. Are then infact changing the EULA or just giving you another one for the patch. Im not hip to the jive of the Microsoft's EULA.
Close your eyes and think of Redmond, slut! (Score:5, Funny)
DHS sais windows is defective - film at 11 (Score:4, Informative)
A few potential solutions: (Score:3, Funny)
Trucks (Score:5, Insightful)
Transport company X has a fleet of brand Y trucks. It is time to replace a portion of them. So they buy a handfull of brand Z trucks, park them at the entrance then invite the sales rep for brand Y to come by for a talk. "Well we have been thinking of upgrading our fleet of trucks. We are looking for offers, by the way have you seen those new Z trucks? Nice aren't they? So what kinda of deal can we expect from you?"
Then ask them wich OS they buy and how they deal with their OS seller. Watch them be confused.
It is sensible business. If you are a fleet manager and you would come to your boss saying, "Hi boss, I completely standarized on brand Y trucks, our repair shops can repair nothing else, our drivers can drive nothing else, our loading stations can accept nothing else, we are now one hundred procent at their mercy of brand Y. Oh hi Mr Sales rep from Brand Y, why are you grinning like that?"
Such a fleet manager would be fired in an instant.
In IT, that is what has been taking place for the last decade. The same trucking companies that do everything to get their trucks with the cheapest discount hand over their IT to companies selling just one solution and totally tie their entire company to just one supplier.
Insanity but when it comes to IT common business rules do seem to apply.
In holland the goverment tries to keep monopolies from happening. Market forces can after all only work if there is more then one player right?
So we get silly stuff like the attempt to run more then one company on the dutch rail system (crowded in a crowded country) or Shell being stopped from owning more highway gas stations. Or even sillier stuff like privatizing stuff like gas and elec even medical insurance. All meant to drive down price and all the price does is skyrocket up.
And what is done about the ultimate monopoly? Shit all. Forget Shell owning 80% of dutch highway gas stations. Try MS owning 9*% of all the worlds desktops.
Face it. IT doesn't follow normal rules. No you would not accept a new EULA (or any EULA at all) when your car company recalls your car to have your brakes fixed. In IT MS owns your ass and they can do whatever they want.
But it easy to buy another brand of truck. For proof, just look at your big local trucking company, they almost always got a handfull of trucks of another manufacturer. Keeps your supplier on its toes and the costs are trivial. Now try doing the same with computers. Oh it used to be done. Only a very BAD IT manager would not make sure that his IBM datacenter did not have a couple of Sun machines installed in plain sight. But when it comes to desktops we have come to accept lock-in (says a linux user and someone who refuses to answer personal ads that accept only .doc cv's) and we all can see the result.
Accept lock-in and get locked in. Yet the old trick does work. Look at munich. MS sales rep fell all over himself when he came into his clients office and saw the linux trucks parked outside. In fact MS wherever there is a rumor that a linux truck is even passing MS sends its sales reps with freebies and special deals. And still, the majority of sales meetings with MS go like this. "Ah thank you for your replying to my outlook email, can we shedule a meeting in outlook, I will get your details from access, to meet up and discuss us buying 100 more licenses, I will send you the details in a Word document, btw what kind of pricecut can we look forward too?"
You can hardly blame MS for it can you? Not their fault that everyone has their head up their ass when it comes to IT.
license != contract (Score:3, Informative)
Arguments about single-sided contracts do not apply to licenses.
How about a EULA clearing house? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:It's Legal (Score:5, Interesting)
Security is a reasonable expectation.
Re:It's Legal (Score:3, Insightful)
If Microsoft isn't providing secure software (and yes, they aren't), then they should b
Re:It's Legal (Score:3, Funny)
Unless your taking a shot at someone paying for secure linux when they do not have to, as they could have used this secure distribution based on S [ubuntu.com]
Re:It's Legal (Score:3, Interesting)
And yes, I would call it overall secure. I would also say that the developers/distros do a good job of staying on top of the bugs. But if security is job 1, then openbsd, or a trusted *nix(trusted
The court rulings on this are mixed. (Score:5, Interesting)
Other sellout--err judges have held eulas are valid contracts.
To me it seems like they should all be invalidated in their entirety. EULAs as contracts are not negotiated between two parties who have equal latitude. One party has extreme market power, and the other doesn't even have the capacity for negotiation with said entity and has the choice of either accepting unreasonable terms or living in a cave by candle light. (no,that's not an exaggeration; companies are now insisting they still own your electronics even after you buy them --see microsoft tirades against xbox modders--)
Re:The court rulings on this are mixed. (Score:4, Interesting)
In all cases I've seen in Europe the rulings on EULAs have invalidated them entirely. This means in theory you can buy press "Ok" to the EULA in a different country then go back to the US and never be under the EULA.
Re:Exchange of mutual consideration (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Exchange of mutual consideration (Score:5, Insightful)
The windows box didn't advertise that it contained buffer overflows - this wasn't a feature that was purchased. The consumer wanted a working version of the software - this is what they paid for.
Now, paying for Media Player 10 vs Media Player 7 would certainly fall under the category of an enhancement. However, asking for a fix to a buffer overflow in Media Player 7 (without upgrading it to a later version) would not.
Basically, the issue is whether products are required to meet some basic standard of security for some period of time after release. Patches for 10-year-old Windows NT are one thing. Patches for software that was purchased six months ago are something else. Companies should be required to support software with security patches for at least a few years after they sell the last copy.
Re:Exchange of mutual code (Score:3, Insightful)
"Offering" a patch while tying it to a different license is entirely unreasonable, and amounts to the same thing as not offering the patch at all.
In fact, what it amounts to is extortion -- an "agree to my [new, unreasonable] terms or the software dies" k
Re:Exchange of mutual rules. (Score:3, Informative)
Ignoring the fact that "Slashdot" includes a large number of opini
Re:Exchange of mutual consideration (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Are they even enforceable? (Score:5, Informative)
I think it's just on products that you already bought where the EULAs' validity is questionable. The reasoning was that the terms of the transaction were already finalized... you paid money and got your product. The EULA tries to add on additional terms on top of that, when the transaction was already finalized WITHOUT those terms, or so they say (IANAL and all that). Add onto this the fact that many places won't let you return opened software, and you can see that anyone who CAN'T agree to an EULA for whatever reason is in an unfair position.
But the service packs are free, so this wouldn't apply there.
Re:Are they even enforceable? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think it's quite that simple. For example, if the product was originally advertised as coming with "free security updates", then one could argue that Microsoft is obligated to provide the free updates they advertised under the same terms as the original product. If the EULA isn't enforceable for the original product, then it's probably not enforceable the the service pack. Another example is if you lawfully received the service pack without agreeing to an EULA beforehand (such as if you get an update CD from Microsoft). Or, certain terms in Microsoft's EULAs might also not be enforceable because of their the company's monopoly status.
I'm not actually saying that I *know* that an EULA wouldn't be enforceable, I'm saying that it's not wise to just assume that it is in all cases. Again, talk to a lawyer in your jurisdiction.
Re:Are they even enforceable? (Score:3, Informative)
* of satisfactory quality - which means the product you buy should be reasonably reliable.
* fit for purpose - which means it should
Re:Are they even enforceable? (Score:3, Informative)
Depends on what you mean by "enforcable".
In the UK, copyright law is stricter than in the US. There's no "fair use". You do, actually, need a license to perform any act that requires copying takes place. This includes copying software onto your hard dri
Re:Are they even enforceable? (Score:3, Interesting)
>There's no "fair use". You do, actually, need a license
>to perform any act that requires copying takes place.
This is not completely true. Although no general "fair use" exists, there is special
Re:Splitting hairs. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Splitting hairs. (Score:3, Insightful)
He's not disputing the fact that he needs to install the patches for security reasons. He's upset because this puts him in a situation where he has no other choice other than to agree to the new contract. T
Re:Smug Linux World vs Reality (Score:4, Insightful)
And every time i've used windows, i've faced viruses, nagging, spyware, intrusive spying, and massive inefficiency.
I guess it depends on which aggrivation you want.
Personally I'd prefer one time aggrivation of having to compile and configure things the hard way than continued slowdowns, viruses, hacking, and spyware.
The closest thing out there is OSX but it has the hardware vendor-lock-in problem
this is myth. OSX is a bsd derivitive. This means you can, with the installation of a few libraries (like libgtk), install most unix or linux apps if you don't like apple's stuff.
Granted i'm still quite paranoid over the TPM's on their new intel line, but I've temporarily gotten around that buy buying the last top of the line PPC. It works well, and 3/4 of the software I use is open source.
no i'm not a fanboy though.. if apple's software continues to lose efficiency and usability as has happened with quicktime and itunes on osX I will defect to kubuntu ; )
Re:Smug Linux World vs Reality (Score:3, Insightful)
While I agree that running any applications that use the MS HTML control or similar mechanisms to display untrusted documen
Secure and stable? (Score:3, Informative)
Not if you use Internet Explorer, any version of Outlook, Windows Media Player, Realplayer, Microsoft Word or Excel.
All of these programs have built into their design, at a low level, in a way t
Re:Modifications (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought s/he made it clear enough - Any of them. When first installing any version of Windows, you have to agree to the EULA. Why should the terms of using the software change for a frickin' patch to repair their bugs?
Spoken like someone who has never written software of any consequence. All software has bugs. Do you consider every piece of software you own to be defective?
I've written in the gamut from firmware for bill accepters, to thinclient frontend code that runs on one of the world's major lotto machine vendor's hardware. Some might say that counts as "of consequence". And yes, all software has bugs.
The difference between me and Microsoft, I don't have the arrogance to say the bearer of my paycheck has to renegotiate every time someone finds a bug. In some markets, they call that "extortion". "Gee, really awful that your bill accepter sees the new $5 bills as $100s... Someone should patch that for you ASAP! I'd do it, but I already know what a nightmare the code looks like - But if you toss a new house my way, I suppose I could suffer throught it. Say, could you set me up with that new VP's cute daughter?".
OTOH, Microsoft's biggest problem here doesn't even come from the original product... They actually have the arrogance to use their "fixes" to beta-test their next-gen products on live systems in the wild. Consider just how different a fully updated 2000 looked from XP when XP first came out - Practically identical, I didn't even bother upgrading until my 2k box needed reinstallation (and even then, after XP SP2, it still looks and feels almost the same). And the most recent, we have
Re:Modifications (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Uh, yeah. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Uh, yeah. (Score:3, Informative)
Indeed -- it's really unfortunate that some people don't realize this. Also, it doesn't help that lots of GPL software (especially on Windows) displays it and requires the user to "agree" as if it were one. OpenOffice is guilty of this one, IIRC.
Re:Tricky lawyers... (Score:4, Interesting)
Read: [perkinscoie.com]
Kanitz v. Rogers Cable, Inc., OJ 665 (Ontario Super. Ct., 2002). A Canadian court upheld the validity of an amended clickwrap agreement. Rogers Cable amended its user agreement to include an arbitration clause. The originl agreement allowed for amendment provided Rogers gave notice to its customers by posting it on the website, via email, or by post. Furthermore, the agreement stated that continued use of the service following the notice constituted acceptance of the amended agreement. Rogers added the arbitration clause and posted the notice on its customer support webpage. The court held that Rogers had provided its customers with sufficient notice and that the plaintiff customers had accepted the agreement by their continued use of the service.