Failure to read EULA costs Gamestation customers 5GBP, and their souls. - by Phatose
Phatose on 15/4/2010 at 19:58
(
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2010/04/15/gamestation-we-own-your-soul/1)
Apparently, as a way of making a point about how few people actually read EULAs (as well as an april fools joke), Gamestation added a 'And we own your soul' clause to it's EULAs. People were given the option to opt out, and those who did got a 5 pound gift certificate, in addition to retaining ownership of their immortal souls.
Only 12% opted to keep their souls and take their 5 Pounds, which highly suggests most souls are equivalent to over 5 GBP of debt. Or that no one actually ever reads these things - which, we all already know.
I know there are plenty round here who don't care for EULAs, but when people don't read the terms period, I have to wonder if restrictive EULAs are the problem, or the obvious consumer indifference. Can we really hold companies responsible for restrictive EULAs when the typical consumer doesn't even read what they agree to?
Sulphur on 15/4/2010 at 20:31
When a typical EULA is as interesting to read through as an essay on the mating habits of freshwater snails and probably five times as long, with most of the important stuff evasively couched in layers of legalese, I think the problem isn't so much people not reading them as it is the EULAs being, by legal necessity, obtuse and specifically engineered to appeal to the ADD-addled side in us all.
Do I get any points for having the longest run-on sentence of the day?
Phatose on 15/4/2010 at 20:45
No, but you get to keep your soul.
Al_B on 15/4/2010 at 21:03
Quote Posted by Sulphur
When a typical EULA is as interesting to read through as an essay on the mating habits of freshwater snails and probably five times as long
Apparently it was their online terms and conditions:
(
http://www.gamestation.co.uk/Help/TermsAndConditions/) Gamestation terms and conditions: 4632 words
(
http://dillonr.people.cofc.edu/AnimBehav.pdf) Essay on freshwater snail mating: 7718 words
Both are approximate, but I think the snails still win...
Sulphur on 18/4/2010 at 19:10
Snails are gender-ambiguous? Gender on demand mating roles? Who'd'a thunk! You're right, that paper's... longer than I expected.
But hang on. I'm using rhetoric here. How d'you expect me to spew my stuff if you choose to throw up - frankly, quite boring - contravening evidence? :mad::mad:
Enchantermon on 18/4/2010 at 19:30
Quote Posted by Sulphur
Snails are gender-ambiguous? Gender on demand mating roles? Who'd'a thunk! You're right, that paper's... longer than I expected.
...you actually read that?
Sulphur on 18/4/2010 at 19:39
How else could I have claimed my initial statement? And who, anyway, wouldn't be tempted to read a lengthy treatise on arcane and esoteric mating practices?
Bluegrime on 18/4/2010 at 19:45
I generally only read the EULA on things that connect to the internet or have automatic updating. And even then I pick out the parts about access rights, automatic updates, and all those other scary things everyday programs can do to your computer these days.
And recently PunkBusters has re-affirmed me on reading those things, given the outlandish things they require you to agree to let them do.
Nameless Voice on 19/4/2010 at 01:04
I personally think that any and all EULAs should be legally meaningless and void because no one can actually read the things. They're so convoluted that it is at the very least completely impractical to ever read them, and sometimes impossible to understand them without hiring someone from a legal profession.
Someone should make a law about it. Plain English or invalid.
