BnetD Case Decided

[Thing]

For the two of you that don't read EFF or /. take a peak at this:
http://eff.org/news/archives/2004_09.php#001962
IMO this is bad bad bad.

[Soul Taker]

Yea, I don't even understand how this is possible.  All our rights can be waived by a click-through agreement?  What the fuck is that?
Not only that, but as many commenter pointed out, you can't see the license agreement before you try to install the game.  Then if you don't agree to it, you probably can't return the game because it's already been opened.
Additionally, what if I, say, deleted the TOS.txt from the archives before I installed the game, and installed it without ever reading the license agreement.  Am I legally held to a contract I never saw or agreed to?  None of this makes much sense!

[Stealth]

Definitely not a positive ruling. Fortunately, the EFF is appealing.

[Grok]

The Patriot Act decision is far more important and I'm happy about that ruling.

[quasi-modo]

grose.

[MyndFyre]

Yea, I don't even understand how this is possible.  All our rights can be waived by a click-through agreement?  What the fuck is that?
Not only that, but as many commenter pointed out, you can't see the license agreement before you try to install the game.  Then if you don't agree to it, you probably can't return the game because it's already been opened.
Additionally, what if I, say, deleted the TOS.txt from the archives before I installed the game, and installed it without ever reading the license agreement.  Am I legally held to a contract I never saw or agreed to?  None of this makes much sense!

Why is the fact that "our rights can be waived by a click-through agreement" surprising to you?  If you don't like the fact that Blizzard licenses its software for a particular use -- that is, to be used on their servers.

I don't like the ruling, but IMHO it's fairly cut-and-dry legally speaking.

[edit]Also, it's not just a "Click-Through" agreement -- you're supposed to read and agree to the license agreement before installing the software.  Installation of the software is tacit agreement to the terms of the EULA.[/edit]

[Soul Taker]

Yea, I don't even understand how this is possible.  All our rights can be waived by a click-through agreement?  What the fuck is that?
Not only that, but as many commenter pointed out, you can't see the license agreement before you try to install the game.  Then if you don't agree to it, you probably can't return the game because it's already been opened.
Additionally, what if I, say, deleted the TOS.txt from the archives before I installed the game, and installed it without ever reading the license agreement.  Am I legally held to a contract I never saw or agreed to?  None of this makes much sense!

Why is the fact that "our rights can be waived by a click-through agreement" surprising to you?  If you don't like the fact that Blizzard licenses its software for a particular use -- that is, to be used on their servers.

I don't like the ruling, but IMHO it's fairly cut-and-dry legally speaking.

[edit]Also, it's not just a "Click-Through" agreement -- you're supposed to read and agree to the license agreement before installing the software.  Installation of the software is tacit agreement to the terms of the EULA.[/edit]

How is the fact that a company can totally deny us our court-granted rights just because we install some software not shocking to you?
And as I said, what if the user never even sees the license, such as by circumventing it or using a cracked installer without one.  How is being legally bound to some contract you never saw or agreed to, or even knew existed, fine with you?

[muert0]

If a user uses a cracked version or alters the software before they install it they are breaking the law. There is no legal way to install the game and not have to pass through the EULA.

[Soul Taker]

If a user uses a cracked version or alters the software before they install it they are breaking the law. There is no legal way to install the game and not have to pass through the EULA.

And that's irrelevant to the point I posed.

[muert0]

And as I said, what if the user never even sees the license, such as by circumventing it or using a cracked installer without one.  How is being legally bound to some contract you never saw or agreed to, or even knew existed, fine with you?

If a user uses a cracked version or alters the software before they install it they are breaking the law. There is no legal way to install the game and not have to pass through the EULA.

And that's irrelevant to the point I posed.

If you say so. Read what you said though...

[MyndFyre]

How is the fact that a company can totally deny us our court-granted rights just because we install some software not shocking to you?

Evidently they aren't court-granted, because the court would have had to side with precedent.

And as I said, what if the user never even sees the license, such as by circumventing it or using a cracked installer without one.  How is being legally bound to some contract you never saw or agreed to, or even knew existed, fine with you?

If the user never sees the license, then he never opened the package; the license is part of the electronic distribution unless he altered the original binary or the binary in memory, which is illegit; or it's part of the physical package.

[Soul Taker]

Both of you, the fact remains, illegal or not, are you bound to a contract you never saw or even knew existed, let alone agreed to?  Anyone can download a program, not knowing it's been cracked and had the installer modified.

[muert0]

PLaying ignorant isn't enough to prove innocence.

[Soul Taker]

PLaying ignorant isn't enough to prove innocence.

Innocence from WHAT?  The point is NOT that the software is pirated, whether you know it or not.  The point IS that you don't even know a contract exists!

[Banana fanna fo fanna]

Couldn't you plead the 5th if you pirated software?