Using EULAs To Bait and Switch 26
jalefkowit writes "Watchfire, the company behind the popular Web accessibility testing package Bobby, has come up with an innovative way to squeeze money out of customers: they changed the licensing terms of Bobby for the latest release, but don't mention the changes in any of their sales materials -- the first time you'll hear about it is in the EULA, when you install the software. The kicker is, the changes mean that some customers will now have to buy many, many more copies of Bobby than before -- and if the new cost is too rich for your blood, they won't refund the money you paid before you found out about the new terms, since they laid it all out in the EULA! Your options are to either pony up for the additional licenses, or ditch Bobby without ever getting back the money you paid up front. I've written up my experiences dealing with Watchfire and their "upgrade" to Bobby 5.0 -- consider it a cautionary tale for people considering upgrading their own copies, or for anyone who's concerned about how EULAs let companies dodge responsibility for being honest with customers."
So file a complaint (Score:5, Informative)
Does Canada have something along the lines of a AG for each province?
Re:So file a complaint (Score:2)
It's not very often that government can help, use it when ever possible.
Although, I don't see the point of using Bobby to begin with...
Re:So file a complaint (Score:2)
I would've contacted a lawyer the minute they refused to let me return my software if I was them.
Re:So file a complaint (Score:5, Informative)
Filing with the Mass AG is a good idea -- when I've talked to them they've always been very helpful (I live in Mass).
Furthermore, the practice described in the article seems to violate a major provision of the Mass Consumer Protection Law [state.ma.us] (emphasis mine):
Seems to me that since this change would have affected the decision to make the purchase, the law is pretty cut and dried on this. Of course, IANAL....
Re:So file a complaint (Score:2)
Re:So file a complaint (Score:2)
IANAL, but he woudl be on very strong legal ground. Several cases, including this one [slashdot.org] have said that EULAs cannot be binding specifically because the terms of sale are not disclosed before the sale occurs. You are only bound by the terms of sale disclosed beforehand. And it *is* a sale. If this sale meets the bait and switch criteria, there are specific applicable laws against it which could potentially mean people go to jail over this.
There are also some laws about returning things. Apparently anythi
Well.... (Score:3, Interesting)
I heard someone say one time that EULAs should be 100 words or less. If you can't tell someone how not to use your product in 100 words or less then you either have not made a good product, did not secure it well enough against misuse, or are trying to slid something by the end user that you don't want the end user to have a good handle on.
I found that idea very interesting..
at least can you downgrade? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:at least can you downgrade? (Score:3, Interesting)
Not-for-Profit vs. For-Profit Software (Score:3, Insightful)
Sounds like it's time for someone to start another Open Source project on SourceForge. (Alas, it won't be me, but I'm hoping others will step up to the challenge.)
Re:Not-for-Profit vs. For-Profit Software (Score:4, Informative)
If I understand correctly... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's frustrating, and arguably sleazy, although I can see their motivation for doing it. And I'm sure they didn't advertise "Now missing one of your favorite features!" on the box.
But how does this qualify as "changing the licensing terms"? Nothing you've said (AFAICT) involves a change in licensing terms. You have a reasonable cause to be angry but it seems to me you're throwing around accusations in an entirely dishonest way.
Re:If I understand correctly... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:If I understand correctly... (Score:4, Informative)
This is the list of changes in 5.0 from their website. Nowhere in it do I see that it removed a feature. In fact it says they have improved reporting. That's a misleading ad if I've ever seen one.
What's New in Bobby(TM) 5.0?
Bobby 5.0 is a comprehensive web accessibility desktop testing tool that incorporates the scanning and reporting functionality of Watchfire® WebQA(TM). Over the past months, we gathered feedback from all previous Bobby users and addressed the common issues in this release. Enhancements include:
Spidering Abilities
* Flash links
* JavaScript parsing and execution
* http(s)
* Session IDs
* Logins
* Now able to scan larger sites than ever before
Reporting
* Improved Section 508/WCAG reporting
New Options
* Advanced scan and report options
HTML Editor Integration
* Now you can fix errors quickly and easily
Extensive online help
* Explains why certain errors are reported as issues
Re:If I understand correctly... (Score:1)
Re:If I understand correctly... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:If I understand correctly... Foxpro? (Score:2)
That's frustrating, and arguably sleazy, although I can see their motivation for doing it. And I'm sure they didn't advertise "Now missing one of your favorite feature
No surprise (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:No surprise (Score:2)
Exactly, ZoomText which makes windows accessible to the visually impared costs something like $400-$700 a license and if you are a university, you have to buy several licenses instead of being
Re:No surprise (Score:2)
Re:No surprise (Score:2)
Re:No surprise (Score:2)
In other news... (Score:2, Funny)
Scrutiny (Score:1)