![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Planesman
![]() Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 191
Downloads: 90
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
Your very entry here makes this clear. Is a certain hostility towards such a policy that hard to understand? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Grey Wolf
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Treading Water
Posts: 847
Downloads: 56
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
I don't like it either, but they can sell whatever they want. As long as consumers buy it, they can even make a profit. I chose to accept the risk and not tilt the windmill, but I respect other peoples stand on the principal, as long as it is truly principled. I do not respect indignant claims of being swindled when they are coupled with the inability to read clearly labeled products before buying however. Clearly, Ubi did a poor job of mitigating the risk inherent in their model, on top of pissing folks off with the whole concept, but they certainly did not mislabel the product. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Medic
![]() Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 164
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Is that really so? Do big multi-national companies have the right to sell products in a way that inhibits basic customer rights (like resale of goods)?
We know that this is a very grey legal area here, the EULA counts for nought. By the time you see it, Retailers will not accept returns of the software, which is the whole point of the EULA. The main problem is that EU law, unlike US Law, is not well tailored to class-action type lawsuits. Because I firmly believe UBI would lose and at least have to permit resale of OSP games if they were challenged in court. But that's all besides the question anway. The question really is: Do we want to let them get away with "selling whatever they want" or do we show them some border of acceptable behaviour by voting with our wallets? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Silent Hunter
![]() Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: standing watch...
Posts: 3,856
Downloads: 344
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Swabbie
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 6
Downloads: 30
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
IANAL but I'm not aware of this being tested in a European court, does anyone else know of any cases? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Watch
![]() Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 19
Downloads: 17
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
In some of the cases the argument is that you can see the EULA before you actually install anything (ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg), especially if the box states that there's a EULA to agree to before you install it. Another (Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology) was over a company claiming on the outside of the box that their software worked with MS-DOS but that they couldn't be held liable for anything if someone actually opened the box. When it turned out it didn't work with MS-DOS after all they got sued, and it was ruled that that EULA was unenforceable. That's a gross oversimplification of both cases, mind you. I haven't looked at Ubisoft's EULA for SH5. It wouldn't surprise me to see a clause in there stating that they can't be held liable if their servers are inaccessible. Don't know if that would stand up in court, either. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of cases around this sort of thing, and there are dozens, if not hundreds, of different answers about it. The best thing to do, if you really want to spend the time and money to find out, is contact a copyright attorney. edit- looking at the EULA now, which has a few funny clauses. Technically speaking you may not A) install the game (as this makes copies of the multimedia work from the CD to your hard drive), B) "To modify the Multimedia Product or create any derived work", which sounds like no modding, and C) " To create or distribute unauthorised levels and/or scenarios" which would also cover modding including, possibly, stuff like Trigger Maru, RFB, Monsun, etc. Furthermore, the user must acknowledge that A) Ubisoft can collect personal data (they don't say what exactly except for that its allegedly in line with their privacy policy), B) that Ubisoft is not responsible for "damages" resulting from the "inability to use the product" which I totally called in my paragraphs above, and that C) the only warranty for the game provided is 90 days for the physical disk, with no warranty whatsoever on the ability to connect to the servers. So there you go. All you modders, shame on you. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |||||
Ace of the Deep
![]() Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,013
Downloads: 124
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But of cause Local law takes presidence over this EULA.
__________________
Windows 7, 64bit. Phenom II 965BE (OC 4cores @ 3.8 Ghz). Radeon HD4870 (1gb gddr5). 6gb Ram. Last edited by jwilliams; 03-16-10 at 06:10 AM. |
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Ace of the Deep
![]() Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: No-good Missouri scum
Posts: 1,223
Downloads: 43
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
They have no bearing on copyright laws, nor customer's rights. Anyone can write up a document but it holds no water until the legal system backs it. And this DRM nonsense has no such backing. Quite the contrary.
__________________
"When Gary told me he had found Jesus, I thought, Yahoo! We're rich! But it turned out to be something different." - Jack Handey |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |||
Ace of the Deep
![]() Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,013
Downloads: 124
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
And EULA's have won a few legal cases. Here's one example (Davidson & Associates are the lawyers for BLIZZARD (world of warcraft)) :- Quote:
So as you can see, EULA's do have legal backing.
__________________
Windows 7, 64bit. Phenom II 965BE (OC 4cores @ 3.8 Ghz). Radeon HD4870 (1gb gddr5). 6gb Ram. Last edited by jwilliams; 03-16-10 at 08:15 AM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Commodore
![]() Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: England
Posts: 628
Downloads: 62
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Great! I'm going to write up my own EULA, slap it on some dodgy, overpriced products, and as soon as someone buys said products, they have automatically agreed to my conditions of sale, where they have no rights and can't return the product for any reason.
I wonder how long I'll get away with it, before I'm dragged off to court, fined, and possibly imprisoned! Ah, the hypocrisy of law. What's all well and good for the corporations, is highly illegal for the individual.
__________________
"I must confess that my imagination refuses to see any sort of submarine doing anything but suffocating its crew and floundering at sea." - H. G. Wells
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Captain
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Seattle, Wa. USA
Posts: 530
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 0
|
Williams is right, and you can be sure that a company like UBI has lawyers working for them just like any company does and have had them go over the entire thing and assured them of the legalities.
I dislike this DRM thing as much as anyone, but rest assured no company would implement something like this without having it checked over by their lawyers before doing so. No buisness in it's right mind would do otherwise. Especially one thats in the software industry, where rights and leagalities abound. I work in the housing industry, and our company doesnt do or say anything without consulting the companies lawyers. We can be in deep crap for anything given the way the fair housing act is written.
__________________
"Chance favors the prepared mind" |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Medic
![]() Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 164
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
BigBang, if you can prove that the product doesn't work, that may be one thing, but if you simple do not agree with certain clauses in the EULA? What do you do then? Look, it's really simple: You can't redefine or change contract terms AFTER the sale is made final. If by opening the box and reading the EULA the sale is made final (i.e., your retailer will not accept opened software) then the EULA can not be legally binding, otherwise it would equal a contractual term FORCED on your as customer with no way out. But that's besides the point, which is: Do you really want a company to have the right and sell a defective product with no legal recourse for the customer? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | ||
Navy Seal
![]() Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,501
Downloads: 19
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Anyway, as someone who writes EULAs, and having a lawyer that advises me on such things, I can assure you that they only exist to fool the gullible. When challenged, then unless the user has broken an underlying law (such as the Copyright Act), they don't hold up well at all. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Fleet Admiral
![]() |
![]()
^
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | |
Medic
![]() Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 164
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
The EULA is not legally binding in many EU countries. And it logically can't be - once you get to read it, you can't return the game anymore since the shops do not accept returns on opened software. So no, they can not put any specific restrictions in the EULA, which you are only made aware of AFTER you bought the game and can't return it if you disagree. If they have any specific restrictions to claim they need to be visible before opening the box. This is not the case. So your standpoint is legally wrong. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|