New Dell Clickthrough Software License 1003
Petrol writes "I just read that Dell is installing a new mandatory click-through software license at first boot. From the article, Dude, you're getting screwed:
'Kat and I just received the Dell Inspiron 5100 notebook we ordered from Dell Canada. We quickly ran across problems.'"
Problem with that... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Problem with that... (Score:5, Insightful)
Or.. (Score:5, Funny)
"By openning this package you agree to the following license."
Re:Problem with that... (Score:5, Informative)
It's an extra partition on the HD (Score:5, Informative)
Apparently, the Inspiron 5100s have the default BIOS boot order set to boot the HD before the CD. (See a post near the end of this article's comments from a guy that mass-installed Linux on some 5100s where he worked. This was not the case with my 8200 from what I remember, which DID have this EULA.) Pressing F2 at bootup lets you change this to a more sensible order, after which you can insert your favorite OS install CD and nuke the EULA partition into oblivion without ever even booting it.
Re:It's an extra partition on the HD (Score:5, Informative)
If you use the setup disk that comes with dell servers to auto-reformat everything, it will still create that 30mb EISA partition, then prompt you for your OS install disk of choice (linux, obviously). Their do have decent kickstart files on the install disk, making installing linux somewhat faster if you don't mind their default settings on the version that they support (last dell server I bought was for RH 7.2, been a while)
The EULA's can't be enforcable (IANALEBIR/.) and I personally can't wait until this finally goes to court. I can't see how any EULA is enforceable without you signing it. Even the GPL says you can use without acceptance/permission since you didn't sign anything, you just can't distribute it without acceptance.
Someone was once joking about sending Bill Gates a letter with a $5 bill inside, and a note "by opening this letter, you agree to sell me your car for $5. Please forward your keys and title to..."
Dell Intends to commit fraud. (Score:5, Insightful)
What's really troubling about all this is that Dell is selling you a system, collecting your money, and then trying to change the terms of the deal after the deal has been closed. They are not telling you about the restrictions in the licence terms before you pay your money and commit to the deal. You open the box and you find that Dell intended to give you less than they told you about, up front.
THIS IS FRAUD!
No honorable person can do this to his customers. How can we escape the conclusion that there are no honorable people in charge at Dell? I don't understand why we, as a culture, don't treat these dishonorable people like the criminals that they are.
Adrian
Re:Problem with that... (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, the FIRST thing I do is boot to a bootable CD with Drive Image in it. I make a virgin image onto CD-R, lock it away, then reformat the drive and reinstall from scratch. I started doing this back in the "shovelware" era (which still hasn't stopped for some mfgs) where the machine would come preloaded with tons of useless crap.
Also I've received machines from major manufacturers that had really bad installs; wrong drivers, missing drivers, etc. I found I had much more stable machines if I just threw out their installs and did my own.
Re:Problem with that... (Score:5, Insightful)
Link to license (Score:5, Funny)
For those of you considering an Dell Purchase, I suggest you read it. [rinkworks.com]
Re:Link to license (Score:4, Funny)
I'd say the big deal is that Dell legally prevents me from using my new fucking computer without requiring that I inconvenience a fucking friend with a fucking Internet connection, instead of just putting the fucking agreements in the fucking box like they should.
Licensing is an important issue for some people. Not everyone is willing to agree blindly to anything just so they can get BonziBuddy installed on Internet Explorer.
You did not read the article (Score:3, Informative)
You did not read the article closely (Score:4, Informative)
Another couple of problems (Score:4, Interesting)
Further, what if I let my 7 year old son have "the honors" of booting up the computer? Just because he pressed a key when he was told to, doesn't mean that I'm legally obligated by the agreement. I haven't agreed to anything.
Further, what if I set this system up for my elderly grandparents. It doesn't belong to me, how can I be the one who agrees to it? Anyone who wanted to dodge this could *easily* claim that they never saw this screen, but that they had a friend or child set it up for them.
I get razzed all the time at work... (Score:5, Interesting)
So you'd think that before we install a Visual Studio upgrade, we'd all get together in a meeting room and go over the EULA we will all be required to agree to.
(Ok, have you finished laughing yet? Good, I'll go on.)
As you already guessed, nobody reads the damned EULA... except me. I no longer read it from top to bottom, but I skim it for the latest additions. This earns me some good-natured razzing from my co-workers, but I've discovered some doozies.
Remember those "required patches"? When I installed them, there was a EULA. This one said, "You are not allowed to publish the results of benchmark testing of the
Another memorable EULA quote: I'm forbidden to use Visual Studio tools to make any word processing or spreadsheet application, unless it's a small part of a larger application. Unlike Open Source, if a Microsoft-enchained programmer (like me) invents a better mousetrap, they're verboten to release it.
If end-users actually read the EULAs (like our heroes in the article), there'd be riots in the virtual streets. As it is, nobody reads the EULA, and ignorance is bliss [chuckjerry.com].
It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Insightful)
Rights are rights, and rights and limitations granted by accepting agreements should stick. If the user can't be bothered to read the agreement before accepting it, the company shouldn't be bothered trying to enforce what contract law states that the cops and courts should enforce automatically.
If ignorance of law is no defense of violation of law.. how can ignorance of contract be any defense at all?
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:4, Interesting)
It's interesting how companies will spend lots of money and resources properly aquiring real estate but totally blow past the legalese for software. If this isn't an inicator about the immaturity of the software industry, I don't know what would be.
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Insightful)
Rights are rights, and rights and limitations granted by accepting agreements should stick.
Yes, but have you really agreed to the EULA when you click "I Agree"? Legally, that's untested.
I think we'd all agree that you can't put a EULA on the screen with the words "If you blink in the next 30 seconds, you affirm acceptance of the follwing terms and conditions." Right? So why is "by clicking, you agree" considered legally binding?
I have yet to see a single, documented, upheld court decision asserting that these click-throughs are really legally binding. Admitedly, the UCITA laws change it a little, but then it changes from someone challenging EULAs to someone challenging EULAs as allowed by UCITA.
If ignorance of law is no defense of violation of law.. how can ignorance of contract be any defense at all?
True, but the ambiguous point of click-through licenses is that you've not really signed any contract, especially in cases like this, where they ask you to accept something you haven't seen (and which they've failed to provide you). If you close your eyes and just hit keys randomly until the EULA screen goes away, can you legally be held responsible for whatever may have been "agreed to" without your knowledge or consent?
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Informative)
Actually it's not a grey area at all. Any contract signed by an unemancipated youth is null and void if the youth decides that they don't want to be bound by it. In the case of child actors and such it is the primary caregiver or some other responsible agent that signs the contract and pledges that the child will work, not the youth.
Each state in the United States has their own versions of contract law, here's an example from California [weblocator.com]:
So yes, this would most likely get around any user agreement or contract that you have to "click-through". Just have your 5 year old kid press the key and click on the buttons and then you are home free to do whatever you want with the software. Of course if it came down to a court case you would have to convince a court that you truly never saw or agreed to the clauses.
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:4, Insightful)
And what of it? If ABC Software Company expects me to be legally bound to an agreement, they'd damned well better make certain that I'm the one who agreed to it. If they really want it to be binding, they'd need to have a Real Person (TM) watch me click "I Agree" or sign a real physical contract. Instead they're willing to entrust that responsibility entirely to a computer that has no idea if it is even a human being, much less the actual purchaser of the product, that is agreeing.
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd love to see something like this go to court...just to show the sad state things are in.
Link to Supr. court decision upholding click-thru (Score:4, Informative)
Here's a U.S. Supreme Court Decision that does just that: InfoWorld article [infoworld.com]
Re:Link to Supr. court decision upholding click-th (Score:5, Insightful)
Of EULAs and click-throughs (Score:5, Funny)
My first experience with this kind of nonsense was with a box containing the install disks (and by "disks" here, I mean 3.5" floppies, this being about 13 years ago) for Macintosh System 6.3. There, spanning the gap over the disks in their little plastic tray, was a paper sticker proclaiming that, by breaking the seal, you agreed to...something. Of course there was no room on the sticker for the actual contract you were supposedly agreeing to by the tearing of a paper, and it wasn't clear where this "agreement" referred to actually was. But, trickster that I am, I found that I could slip the disks out one by one without tearing the sticker. (Looking back on it now, I suppose I could have cut the back of the plastic tray with a box-cutter, but no matter.)
Since then, of course, this silliness has escalated to the point where the events in the article come to pass: you are required to do something which you could do entirely by accident, which is supposed to signify that you agree to something you aren't told, and in fact have no way of finding out about without doing the thing you're supposed to do. Double Catch-22 ("Catch-44"?).
So how about this: we start sending mail (real, physical mail might make more of an impression, but email could be good for a larf too) to these companies, proclaiming on the outside of the envelope (or, in the case of email, in the Subject: or some other more obscure header line) that, "by opening this mail, you agree to the enclosed agreement". Then, inside, you have whatever agreement amuses you. For example:
If anyone ever tries to call you on their EULA, simply fire back that they agreed to your UALA (User Abuser License Agreement) too, and it's equally enforceable.
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Insightful)
What would be very helpful is if you could establish the "looks like a duck, quacks like a duck" precedent that as a matter of public policy it is indistinguishable from a sale, so that your comment would apply.
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:4, Informative)
Oh we all wish. But it ain't so Joe.
We have a full line of bad cases out there that make them enforceable.
Fire up WestLaw/Lexis and read ProCD.p rocd.htm
ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg, 86 F.3D 1447 (7th Cir., June 20, 1996)
Also, http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Insightful)
But the fact is, they're not "accepting an agreement". They are either "installing software" or "applying a patch".
Either of those activities is something they are legally allowed to do, since they've already paid for the software.
Popping up a piece of legalese and claiming that a person agrees to it by performing some other action- which you have no right to forbid him from doing- is invalid. Watch this: "By closing this browser window, you agree to mail Minna Kirai $700". Is that binding? (I wish).
The ProCD decision widely cited as precedent for the validity of shrinkwrap licensing is simply wrong. If it ever gets kicked up to the Supreme Court, they'll immediately see why. It claims that by opening a box, the user has indicated acceptance of a license. But it is impossible to "indicate" anything if the other party has no idea whether or not you've performed the action! "Indication" can only happen if communication occurs.
The parties to a shrinkwrap or click-thru "license" are not in communication, thus they have no way to enter a contract.
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Interesting)
The same thing applies when you sign a legal waiver. Those can be overruled if the court believes that the injury you experienced was beyond the scope of the waiver.
EULA's are very shady, for the most part, and I would say if one was ever seriously challenged in court, it would very likely be declared non-binding.
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree that ignorance is no excuse, but here's some issues where challenges could be raised:
By the time you get to read a click-thru agreement, you've already made the purchase in a typically non-refundable fashion. They've accepted your money with the only license being their protection under copyright and whatever is printed on the outside of the box. Don't like what's inside, "sorry no refund, you've opened it."
When you're presented with an EULA for a software patch, their basically saying, "we'll fix your broken copy of our software if you agree to the following
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Informative)
b) There is no consideration involved in an EULA, and consideration is a defining attribute of a contract.
c) Software purchases are presented as sales and have all the characteristics of a sale, thus they cannot be contractual obligations.
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:5, Interesting)
Another important point with contracts: the courts have been known to discard clauses that the signatory could not reaonably have expected to be present. The original precedent - I don't have the actual citation handy, I'm sure someone can google it up - was a case where a man signed a friend into the hospital. He thought he was signing consent forms; there turned out to be a clause wherein he agreed to take financial responsibility for the medical bills if the patient was unable to pay. Well, when the bill came due he refused to pay and went to court, where the court agreed that a reasonable person would not expect to find such a clause in the contract.
Given the nature of some of these clauses, particularly on the security patches, I don't think the courts would hold them valid, completely aside from the other obvious points that have been brought up. (Lack of negotiation, consideration, etc.)
Re:It's good that nobody reads them. (Score:4, Insightful)
The EULA is clearly NOT a part of the sale - this is part of number 3. The EULA is only presented AFTER money has changed hands. For the EULA to be part of the sale, the EULA would have to be presented and signed at the time of purchase. Software companies don't want the hassle and lost sales that actually presenting them as contract agreements would entail, so they treat them like sales but claim they're contracts. Fuck that.
The reason I pulled you over... (Score:3, Insightful)
" No, officer. I didn't actually READ the posted speed limit. May I go now? "
Last I checked, being ignorant of the terms of an agreement one enters into, when those terms are made clear and available, does not excuse one from abiding by those terms.
If the agreement was INSIDE the shrinkwrap (as has been tried before), and you are made to agree to it by
Re:The reason I pulled you over... (Score:3, Insightful)
The difference being, the speed limit is a LAW and the EULA is a CONTRACT.
If some large company sues you for violating the EULA, your legal defence would be something along the lines of "I'm sorry, I don't recall signing anything to that effect."
Re:I get razzed all the time at work... (Score:3, Interesting)
Thanks.
Re:I get razzed all the time at work... (Score:5, Informative)
This one is the closest to what I remember agreeing to. It's actually the license to use ODBC, which was a virtual requirement for accessing databases from Visual Basic in our environment at the time (apparently '96-'97).
Here's the salient paragraph (emphasis and examples mine):I found a number of references to the
EULA's are terrible (Score:4, Funny)
I've grown to hate dell so much in the last few years. That tech support call is vintage dell. I haven't had a good experience with dell tech support in so long, I can't even remember the last time. Their service personel are hopelessly incompentent...grrrr.
Let me just give an example:
I used to work for a company that had sold a large number of dell rack servers with PERC 3 (i think) RAID controllers. Don't know who made these controllers, but they sucked. BIG TIME. It was to the point where the systems with NO redundancy, just a simple harddrive, were far more reliable.
Every time a RAID controller died, we called dell, and every time they managed to destroy the damn RAID information! EVERY TIME! It didn't matter if they sent a tech, or tried to give us phone support, BAM! The whole thing went into the toilet and we had to try and rebuild it to the point where we could get some information off it.
I've seen a damn situation where a dell tech had to go replace a FRICKING HARD DRIVE. A HOTSWAP harddrive, in a computer that didn't HAVE a raid problem, and the bastard managed to kill the RAID! All he had to do was pull the bad drive, and slot the new one in, and the damn thing would have rebuilt ITSELF!
And on top of all of this, they are SO stingy about sending parts, or replacing faulty equipment. I am NOT going to spend a month rebuilding a whole box one part at a time. That is UNACCEPTABLE! I have to spend hours on the phone trying to work through tech support on an issue where I already know what the problem is and I just need them to send me a fricking part!
I really can't come up with a company I'd be less willing to buy a computer from. I'd buy one off a blanket from a cracked out junkie in Times Square before I'd call them again.
Re:EULA's are terrible (Score:3, Interesting)
Truth is, they won't be.
Packard bell and many others are nowhere to be found nowadays. Compaq was on its last legs when the merger occurred. Home computers (not business computers, though -- different world!) are a commodity, and the tier 1 vendors now firmly believe they can save more by shafting the customers that complain than they can gain by supporting them.
Answer: Buy from a reputa
Easy away around the EULA (Score:5, Funny)
Another alternative is to have your 5 year old child to install the software. He can't agree to anything.
You don't actually need to agree to the EULA to run the software. But if you don't, your license automatically falls into standard copyright law which basically gives you more rights than most EULAs.
Happens in Open Source too! (Score:4, Interesting)
But open source software has some equally bad doozies.
For instance, I write a software application similar to phpMyAdmin. It's open-source by nature since it's written in PHP, but I don't use the GPL or a free software license -- I sell the code and the users are then free to make any modifications they wish, but they have no redistribution rights (much like the vBulletin license. [vbulletin.com])
This software lets clients update a database easily. It uses MySQL as the backend.
Recently, MySQL changed their client license to the GPL. This means that ANY application that uses the MySQL client software (e.g. mysql_connect() and mysql_query() in PHP) must now be GPL, or you must pay a license fee to MySQL. This has upset many developers [heroicdesigns.com], and it will cause PHP itself to drop the MySQL client libraries since PHP isn't a GPL application. (The MySQL client libraries will be a separate download.)
Basically, the MySQL license change has polarized the development community into those who say "F*ck 'em; everything should be under the GPL anyway" and those who say that MySQL led everyone along until it became popular, and then decided to cut off their developers.
I have four choices now:
1) Release my application under the GPL, which grants redistribution rights to anyone I sell it to (i.e. anyone could buy it once and put up the application on Joe Blow's Download Site for free). I don't consider this a viable option because I don't want to allow redistribution rights for free.
2) Pay $220 per server to MySQL for my application. That is to say, pay $220 for our database server, and force my clients to pay $220 if they don't want to use our database server and hosting service. I don't consider this a viable option either, because I feel that it's blackmail.
3) Only use old versions of MySQL with my application.
4) Switch to PostgreSQL.
Obviously, #3 and #4 are what I've decided on. This means porting over 2500 lines of code to ADOdb [weblogs.com] (a database-independent PHP layer which I have used before with great success) and then testing everything with PostgreSQL instead. It means learning an entirely new database, and it means pulling ALL of my existing customers to a new database.
So while you may say that "Microsoft suxx0rs" because of their EULAs, I say that open-source often does the same thing. Look at Red Hat's absurd EOL policy. Why? Because they've finally figured out what step 2 in the following equation is:
1) Release open-source software
2) Charge people money for your product after you've locked then in, since they've already decided to base a business/software product around it
3) Profit!!
Only this won't work for MySQL, and it won't work for Red Hat either. I'm switching away from both. They've both been great for me, but I don't consider blackmail a viable business plan.
Re:Happens in Open Source too! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Happens in Open Source too! (Score:5, Informative)
I think your frustration with mysql and the GPL is based on common misconceptions about free software and teh GPL. First off, "free software" is more like "Freedom" than "zero cost". Look in google for the old discussions about free software vs. free beer. They're not the same thing. Also read Stallman's musings about "software libre" and "software gratis".
Secondly, the GPL's requirements for redistribution are not as all-encompasing as you might think. A program that uses another program that is GPL does not need to be GPL. Consider that many vendors (i.e. Checkpoint, Tivo, Google, VMWare) use linux as a core part of a commercial software product. Some elements of those products, generally modifications to GPL source code, are required to be GPL. However the majority of the product is not at all GPL.
Because MySQL release the client software as a library, you may choose to structure your application so that those portions that directly access the GPL client software are distributed separately, and are released under GPL. The rest of the program would go through your client app to access the mysql cliet library to query the database.
Note that the FSF advises that passing data to & from a GPL program does not normally constitute a derivative work. You would be passing data in a way that is consistent with simply using the program.
see:http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq
Consider these examples,
1. I write a shell script that uses bash, I release that script as a commercial, non-free software product. This is an acceptable distributon of GPL software in conjunction with non-GPL software.
2. I write an extension to bash, that via changes to the bash source code, adds a new capability to bash. Distribution of this extension must be under the terms of the GPL.
Remember that by design, the GPL tries to protect the original rights of the developer, not to attempt to extend those rights onto to new programs not authored by the developer. Don't believ the MS hype about viral software, it's misinformation, and it harms both sides of the free software debate.
Re:I get razzed all the time at work... (Score:3, Informative)
For what it's worth, Network Associates lost a lawsuit [zdnet.co.uk] over this very issue (benchmark banning). Companies will write whatever they want into EULAs but that doesn't make them enforcable... the sad thing is that a lawsuit typically has to be involved
Re:I get razzed all the time at work... (Score:3, Interesting)
No msdn.microsoft.com license? Au contraire? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd paste some of the Terms of Use, but then I'd be violating the third paragraph. Actually, taking the fascistic bent (hey, when has Microsoft ever been a stickler on the terms?) you can't write a program based on the information presented there, since it'd be a derivative work of the information presented there (again, third paragraph).
Of course, this posting is also a derivative work.
Dang it!!
yeah sure. (Score:5, Interesting)
Duh!
First off, I have worked in customer service/tech support and have heard exactly "who reads those things anyway?" "you just click ok." Right.
Second, you are surprised that CSRs don't have ALL the information they need to do their jobs? Policy changes daily and even though the CSRs are the "front line" they are never told until it's too late.
Third, I just dealt with someone today (not computer related). They clicked through a document they should have read. It explained the policy they were trying to excuse themselves from. The exact quote was, "I saw the thing I clicked through, I never read those, no one does. You can't expect me to now agree to that." Sadly, this is commonplace. It's not advantageous to read them or ignore them. If you do read them, you have to go through a lengthy process to return what you disagree with (no company expects that more than a handfull of people will ever decline), if you do agree what good does it do you? You either a) didn't read and comprehend the rights you were signing away or b) you did know, you knew it probably wouldn't matter, and when it did matter, you already sold your soul.
That's why these things should be illegal.
That's my worthless
Duress (Score:3, Interesting)
How much worse do things have to get before EULAs reach the legal standard of "agreed to under duress" for unenfor
Re:yeah sure. (Score:5, Informative)
It isn't, but the highest US Court to consider the issue so far does not agree. Read the bile that is the ProCD opinion [bitlaw.com].
Fortunately, the Supreme Court hasn't ruled yet, so we have some hope that sanity will overcome. If a cooperative software vendor wanted to speed the case to a victorious conclusion, he could just modify 1% of his shrinkwrap EULAs to include an extra provision- something outlandish like an additional $1000 monthly fee as long as the product is installed. The ensuing lawsuit would clearly demonstrate the folly of the ProCD position.
If shrinkwrap/clickwrap is genuinely an opportunity to enter into an arbitrary contract, then such a clause would stand up (and IT departments would start hiring a lot more lawyers to install patches). But of course, intelligent judges will realize that a person engaged in opening/installing software is in no position to pore through legalese, and that contractual agreements cannot be a conventional part of such events.
Wow. (Score:3, Funny)
from reading that article.. (Score:5, Interesting)
hey.. I always agree..
whatever, what on earth can a license from them accomplish anyway?
Perhaps I have been using open source software for too long and am out of the loop, but do these things honestly matter in hardware.. You get a warranty, that is all I care about..
Maybe I am missing something here, but to agree with these stupid licenses on websites that all state they can be changed at any time for any reason would be the legal equiv of suicide in the real business world..
Guess I am just agreeable.. too much floride in my water or something..
Re:from reading that article.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Dell: OK, service tag?
You: 8xchyyw
Dell: OK. What do Windows diagnostics say?
You: Windows? This is running Linux.
Dell: Sorry sir, your laptop is supposed to be running Windows, and is now out of warranty.
You: What? How could running Linux possibly void my warranty?
Dell: Please read your EULA again, sir. Have a nice day. *click*
I'd read all of the agreements if I were you, friend. Lawyers can be nasty creatures.
Soko
Re:from reading that article.. (Score:5, Funny)
Me: Smoke is billowing from my Dell computer. I need a new power supply.
Dell Support: Okay, sir. Please run the Windows diagnostics tools from the start menu.
Me: I'm running Linux.
Support: (Confused at response not listed on script) Okay, close "Linux" from the file menu and run the diagnostics.
Me: But I'm... Er... It's not a software... Oh nevermind. *click*
Customer Support (Score:5, Funny)
I'm finally connected to a Customer Care representative... She insists she doesn't have copies of the agreements, and that I'm supposed to go online and look them up myself. (?!) She says to use a public computer if I have to.
I think we've reached a new low for customer support!
Any Key? (Score:4, Funny)
The worst part is that they wanted him to press a key that doesn't even exist on his keyboard!
Um... (Score:3, Informative)
They have had this for at least the two years we have been buying their workstations & servers.
Wrong (Score:3, Informative)
If you fdisk the hard drive and completely reformat it, you will never see the clickthroughs.
Enforcement (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, lots of software has the agreement in the box, and you can only view it after breaking the seals (making the software unreturnable). Most companies try to get around that by saying you can get a refund if you don't agree to the terms, and then fail to provide a channel for such refunds. Again, as they have broken the agreement, I doubt any further terms would be enforcable.
getting absurd (Score:5, Insightful)
Already slow (Score:5, Informative)
Dell's Software License Policy
Dude, you're getting screwed
28 Aug 2003
Kat and I just received the Dell Inspiron 5100 notebook we ordered from Dell Canada. We quickly ran across problems.
I pushed the power button to turn on computer. I got the Dell POST screen, then a screen from Dell (Photo [slashdot.org]):
But there are no license agreements in the box that the computer came in. [There are some shrinkwrapped CD containers, but the "Terms and Conditions of Sale (CANADA)" that came with the invoice says:
I've never agreed to those Terms and Conditions, to my knowledge, but I assume they think they're enforceable, so I can't open up the shrinkwrap to see if the license agreements are in there, without automatically agreeing to them.]
So I called the only Dell number I could find on my documentation (1-800-847-4096) and spoke to a customer support representative. I told her what was on the screen, and told her I couldn't find the license agreements I'm required to read and agree to before pressing any key.
She put me on hold while she looked into where the license agreements might be, and eventually transferred me to technical support. The tech support agent told me her database was down, so she couldn't look up anything at all (I hadn't even told her what the problem was yet), and I'd have to call back in an hour.
I call back, and speak to a tech support woman. She says: "press Tab." I explain that I can't without saying I've read and agreed to documents I don't have. She says "press page down". Same problem. She says "scroll down". I explain it's not a Windows screen. She says "insert any Dell-shipped CD". I exlpain the problem of opening the CD packaging.
She insists I have to press a key. I ask her if she really means that I have to agree to the licenses before it's at all possible that i've read them. She says "yes". I explain that that's not acceptable, and ask for her supervisor.
Her supervisor insists it's a Customer Care issue, and not tech support, and that there's nothing he can do. He can't explain why they sent me to him. He enters my info into the call log databse, and I go to call back Customer Care.
So back into the hold queue I go.
I'm finally connected to a Customer Care representative. [Pretty much each sentence in the following was interspersed with long, long times on hold.]
She looked up the call log to get the background info. She insists she doesn't have copies of the agreements, and that I'm supposed to go online and look them up myself. (?!) She says to use a
Re:Already slow (Score:3, Interesting)
The reason I opted out originally was that Dell ships an OEM version of Windows XP Pro that requires unplugging additional hard drives (to the original PC setup) in order to reinstall XP (a common occurence with developers). Calls to Microsoft garnered the reply that I should buy an "over-the-counter" version of XP Pro. But, I had just purchase XP with my computer. Why was I so
Re:Already slow (Score:5, Insightful)
That's how to fix this problem. If enough people were calling about it that Alan Burley spent 4 hours a day on this issue, the problem would be solved next release.
Re:Already slow (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Already slow (image) (Score:5, Informative)
Contacting publicly traded corporations (Score:5, Interesting)
In this situation, one needs to write a letter stating one's problem or complaint in clear, calm, non-abusive language. Look up the corporation's VP of Customer Service, Chairman of the Board of Directors, and Chief Legal Counsel (all names should be available through finance.yahoo.com). Send the letter to each of them at the address where the company accepts legal correspondence (also available from public sources). That course of action is far more likely to get results in difficult or complex circumstances than endlessly e-mailing or calling worker bees.
Remember, the worker bees aren't fibbing: they really can't do anything outside corporate policy if they want to keep their jobs
sPh
Re:Contacting publicly traded corporations (Score:3, Insightful)
They should write a letter to the Delaware Attorny General [state.de.us] (according to the SEC web page Dell is incorporated in Delaware) and the Better Business Bureau [bbb.org].
Let them know the customer service manager at Dell told you to lie and accept the conditions of a legal document that they refuse to send you.Invalid license! (Score:5, Informative)
Essentially, the defaults of copyright, customer service, and warranty laws would then apply.
Bad move for Dell, as whatever rights they want you to throw away, you can't! Since the 'License' is non-binding, well. MUHAHAHA!
By Coincidence... (Score:3, Interesting)
My dad was not happy... The thing was fresh out of the box, and here I was explaining to him that the patches had been available at microsoft.com since mid-July, and Dell was shipping unpatched software.
Re:By Coincidence... (Score:4, Informative)
They use an in-house software installation applet called RIATA (don't ask what it stands for, I never knew).
Here's how it works:
The systems are built using the same hardware. Each system is tracked by internal code name (laptops usually follow a cigar theme, desktops another, etc). Once a working profile is created for a particular line of hardware, its stored on the imaging server. Network-enabled DOS-based bootdisks are inserted into the systems and predefined scripts are run that will automatically install the OS and all bundles. If all is successful, the DOS window's background changes to green. Remove the disk, shutdown and move to the next one. If it fails, there's a warning buzz and the screen changes to red. Look at the logs and find out why, restart.
Now, this all sounds relatively easy, but searching for the latest available packages and drivers based on X, Y, Z hardware types and versions is a regular PITA. Fortunately, RIATA replaced FIDA (similar program, developed by the same group) which was a lot shittier.
I worked in a lab. We were CONSTANTLY having to build new RIATA packages for the laptop line.
They probably *do* have the production images updated on a semi-regular basis. Anyone who installs a system or gets a new PC needs to check for the avilability of updates regardless.
Re:By Coincidence... (Score:4, Interesting)
Text mirror (Score:5, Informative)
Something New? (Score:5, Informative)
I was like OK. That was what I did. If you do format the hard drive, then you're not bound to the terms. If you never use that OS, then you are fine.
Okay maybe it wasn't a click-through process. But it said "Press the space bar to agree to the terms of the license agreement."
So, I don't see what the big deal is. You're not forced to agree. You're not agreeing by using the laptop, so what?
Dude, you're duding dude! Dude? (Score:5, Funny)
Before I may enter the website? Before I walk in the store?
How about before I get in the car to go to the store? Before I get internet access?
Before I leave the house in the morning? Before I get a credit card to pay for my ISP?
Before I wake up? Before the internet is invented?
Before I was born? Before the great landmass of Pangea split into the continents we know now?
Before the land that time forgot was forgotten? Before the cosmic dust coalesced into the planets of our solar system?
BEFORE THE FABRIC OF TIME, SPACE AND DIMENSION WERE TORN ASUNDER BY THE GREAT GOD ALGOROTH AND FASHIONED INTO THE UNIVERSE??
Fuck it, I'm getting an Apple.
It doesn't matter... (Score:5, Funny)
Dear Dell,
By opening this letter, you agree to the terms of the revised license agreement herein:
You agree that any prior End User License Agreements to which I have agreed are now invalid.
Thank you,
Checks and Balances (Score:3, Funny)
"By cashing this check you agree to my EULA and all its terms and conditions and you further agree to indemnify me for any legal expenses I may incur if you decide to give me legal trouble. My EULA may be found on my website at
Hey Dell You're nuts (Score:3, Interesting)
Then in Germany they have to disable it or refund. Legally it's a defect of the machine. Every EULA and other crap the dudes invent in their hybris is plainly null and void in Germany.
If you buy something every rules you are forced to accept after the purchase is considered void. And if you are hampered in the use of such a good it is considered a defect and you are entitled for remedy or refund.
This is just another reason... (Score:5, Informative)
My boss just won the raffle for an old company laptop. He went out and purchased a wireless PC card. When he installed it and loaded the software, the software said to install the Windows 98 2nd Edition installation CD. Well, he didn't have one since it was a recently retired company laptop, and installation CDs at the company are VERBOTTEN except for the IT department. I told him if he had an Apple, everything would have worked from the beginning, and he still would not have had to install any additional software. He spent 5 hours playing around with installation CDs at home, calling the wireless PC card company to see if they could just email him the drivers, he's even contacted the company IT department and they haven't gotten back with him yet. By golly, that old laptop sure was a bargain. That's 5 hours he could have used for spending time with his family, having fun, or doing something truly productive. I guess it comes down to "What is your time worth in your life?" Personally, I don't have any time to waste and I need everything to work out of the box with no fuss.
Apple, it's the way to go for personal computing needs. All you can do with a PC is use it as a space heater, a door stop, or an enclosure for a fireworks event.
Re:just another reason... why I put Windows on HD (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, this is so true. That's why I've been putting a copy of Windows in a subdirectory on the hard drive since Windows 98. It just saves so much trouble, and hard drive space is cheap anyway.
"Contracts of Adhesion" are not enforceable...but (Score:5, Informative)
BUT bad people are trying to change all that. They've come up with a proposed law, called the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act, or UCITA. UCITA would, among other things, explicitly make shrinkwrap licenses fully enforceable. This would be a very bad thing.
UCITA is already the law in Maryland and Virginia. If you live in those states, move!
For more information on why UCITA is bad, click here. [4cite.org] Find your state representatives here. [vote-smart.org] Tell them what you think.
Arrgh! (Score:3, Funny)
Person A: You said, "Dude!"
Crowd: Stone him! Stone him!
Person B: He said, "Dude!" too!
Crowd: (Yells and throws stones at everyone)
Unenforcebale (Score:5, Interesting)
If you can't read it, legally, you can't agree to it. It is unenforceable, period. Since it is unenforceable, and invalid on its face, that means the user is bound only by Title 17 copyright law.
Very simple situation.
Perhaps Dell is doing it on purpose because Microsoft is forcing them to use an unacceptable EULA, and this is their way to working around it.
In any event, this isn't exactly a new issue. It's been well covered by contract law for decades, even centuries.
You can't be held to an agreement you weren't allowed to understand.
Scary thought part 2 (Score:3, Interesting)
Dell's been reading Dilbert... (Score:4, Funny)
End User: 'But that will void my warranty.'
Dobgert: "Call me if anything changes."
Clickwrap agreements binding, despite P.O terms. (Score:3, Informative)
-
Has this happened to you? You plunk down a pretty penny for
the latest and greatest software, speed back to your computer,
tear open the box, shove the CD-ROM into the computer, click on
"install" and, after scrolling past a license agreement which
would take at least fifteen minutes to read, find yourself
staring at the following dialog box: "I agree." Do you click on
the box? You probably do not agree in your heart of hearts, but
you click anyway, not about to let some pesky legalese delay the
moment for which you've been waiting. Is that "clickwrap"
license agreement enforceable? Yes, at least in the case
described below.
There are some painful lines in that decision, such as "Money now, terms later" is a practical way to form contracts, especially with purchasers of software."decision by William C. Young, U.S. District Court Judge [haledorr.com]
Slashdot duplicate from three years ago (Score:4, Informative)
Not to brag, but I submitted this story to slashdot three years ago [slashdot.org].
Dell has been doing this for quite some time.
LOL - what an annoying bastard.... (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that he escalted such an issue shows more of how much time he is willing to waste to prove HIS point. Thats really all this was.
I can imagine the author thinking - Hay i'm bored so i'm gonna bitch about the most mundain part of a contract I can and see how far I can get with this, then i'll post it to slashdot where everyone hates M$ and Dell enough that it'll get posted and my website will get tons of traffic and i'll become an internet rockstar - look how 1337 I am.
Besides - how many people "borrow" software from firends - install it, yet obviously had to agree to the EULA that came with it that told them specifically not to do that? And i'm not talking about software "piracy" in the sense of warez, i'm talking about how my aunt gets some cheeseball program and then my cousin says - hay that looks cool can I borrow that to install on my system and so she does - neither one knows/realizes they did anythign wrong - but then again - neither one has that thing called "the internet web"
Re:What's the big deal? (Score:3, Informative)
With that said, changing some crap in the bios passed the screen (??@#$?) but it wasn't purely software.
Re:What's the big deal? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What's the big deal? (Score:5, Insightful)
Really? Are you a lawyer? How did you reach that decision? What country are you discussing when you say that?
For Canada, you're quite wrong [ualberta.ca]. There have been cases and EULAs have been upheld.
In the US, it's more questionable. There have been judgements either way, but from my reading of this article [lawnotes.com] it would apear that they are more likely enforceable than not. The ProCD case is pretty damning from the POV of the average consumer. You don't even need to be able to read the license before agreeing to it as long as you can return the software afterward. Isn't that fun?
There are exceptions. The license cannot violate the law, nor can it be "unconscionable" (yeah, there's a term that'll be fun to define, just like "pornography"). The appellate court's ruling is not binding except inside of it's perview, and even then only specifically to Wisconsin. But it's apparantly a well regarded Federal appellate court and its decision is going to be cited/referred to in any other cases regarding EULAs.
IANAL. But I'm at least willing to do a Google search rather than spout my opinion on this kind of thing. I find most of the more absurd T&C's in EULAs to be "unconscionable", as I'm sure many
Re:What's the big deal? (Score:3, Informative)
Having read the article you linked to, please note the following:
Re:Just install Linux (Score:5, Funny)
Please send me $699 for the use of my username. Thanks.
Article text, no trolling, honest (Score:3, Informative)
- - - - -
Dell's Software License Policy
Dude, you're getting screwed.
28 Aug 2003
Kat and I just received the Dell Inspiron 5100 notebook we ordered from Dell Canada. We quickly ran across problems.
I pushed the power button to turn on computer. I got the Dell POST screen, then a screen from Dell (Phot
Re:Article text, no trolling, honest (Score:3, Informative)
Wow - Having bought a Dell some years ago, I was quite pleased w/ their hardware and support. As such, I've always recommended their laptops though now I guess I'll have to give my recommendations more thought.
While I do recall the 'You agree to the EULA if you open the package' issue, but I don't remember having such hassles.
My feeling is that it might make a bit of difference if more people did what RobertB did - Call Dell and ask for a real explanation. Considering you've just made a 'sizable' purcha
Re:What's the Point of this? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is more of an issue if you are in fields like medical, defense, and other such data / privacy oriented environments. Agree to a EULA that lets a third party monitor data on your computer in these environments and you could conceivably go to prison if not get sued. The factory images can't be trusted, and are always unsuitable to business use. As a result most business or government systems are imaged before ever being put into use.
The other problem is the license agreements are forced to be agreed to blindly without an option to decline. It would be different if the message on boot brought you sequentially through all software liceneses, with an opportunity to decline and still use the hardware. Afterall, it's the hardware that I'm buying, especially if I want to use Linux. The license agreements may be commonplace and ignored, but unfortunately there also presently considered legally enforceable contracts. Makes me wonder when someone will prove a point on this by making a license that requires the turnover of a persons' estate when they die.
Re:What an Ass (Score:5, Informative)
It is also important to raise people's awareness of EULAs before they become even more rediculous. The consumer already gets the short end of the stick with most EULAs, there's no reason to give even more power to the companies.
Re:Court Tested, Mother Approved? (Score:5, Informative)
Hill v. Gateway 2000, 105 F.3d 1147