AGreatWeight Posted December 18, 2017 Posted December 18, 2017 On 12/17/2017 at 9:25 AM, Crosstieger said: Sure, makes sense. It's just that the implementation of said eula is not sufficient and therefor invalid.I've always been under the impression that when you download a mod from Nexus, by the very act of downloading, whether via NMM or manually, you're agreeing to the TOS that the mod author stipulates (whatever they are)Perhaps a moderator can clarify this?
Community Manager Dark0ne Posted December 18, 2017 Community Manager Posted December 18, 2017 Quote I've always been under the impression that when you download a mod from Nexus, by the very act of downloading, whether via NMM or manually, you're agreeing to the TOS that the mod author stipulates (whatever they are) Perhaps a moderator can clarify this? In the eyes of the law, definitely not. The law struggles with the proper EULAs written by lawyers for the world's biggest software makers (Microsoft, Apple, et al) and how legally binding and enforceable they really are, so when we're talking mod author EULAs for using their mods, it's a massive grey area.
Reneer Posted December 18, 2017 Posted December 18, 2017 On 12/18/2017 at 8:06 PM, Dark0ne said: In the eyes of the law, definitely not. The law struggles with the proper EULAs written by lawyers for the world's biggest software makers (Microsoft, Apple, et al) and how legally binding and enforceable they really are, so when we're talking mod author EULAs for using their mods, it's a massive grey area.Unless, of course, you get a lawyer to write one for you.
Community Manager Dark0ne Posted December 18, 2017 Community Manager Posted December 18, 2017 Quote Unless, of course, you get a lawyer to write one for you. Even then, there's plenty of contention in the legal system to suggest that unless you can absolutely force a user to agree to your terms and can prove that they did so, it isn't enforceable. It's a bit of a mess, really.
Reneer Posted December 18, 2017 Posted December 18, 2017 (edited) On 12/18/2017 at 9:09 PM, Dark0ne said: Even then, there's plenty of contention in the legal system to suggest that unless you can absolutely force a user to agree to your terms and can prove that they did so, it isn't enforceable.ÃÂ It's a bit of a mess, really.But that's why every application and website forces you to click that "I agree" checkbox. And there are differing opinions, at least at the U.S. Circuit Court level, regarding whether clicking an "I agree" button is necessary or not. Edited December 18, 2017 by Reneer
Community Manager Dark0ne Posted December 18, 2017 Community Manager Posted December 18, 2017 Indeed, sites and software do it in the hope that it will cover them, rather than in the confident knowledge that it will.
Reneer Posted December 18, 2017 Posted December 18, 2017 (edited) On 12/18/2017 at 9:31 PM, Dark0ne said: Indeed, sites and software do it in the hope that it will cover them, rather than in the confident knowledge that it will. I've found that there are a few court cases involving the GNU GPL that have been upheld in courts simply by the "I agree" method. So there certainly is (some) precedent. Edited December 18, 2017 by Reneer
Community Manager Dark0ne Posted December 18, 2017 Community Manager Posted December 18, 2017 Quote I've found that there are a few court cases involving the GNU GPL that have been upheld in courts simply by the "I agree" method. So there certainly is (some) precedent. It's all about what court the case is taken to. Which is oh so silly. I believe there's been some issues with upholding EULA terms in the EU as well, but I honestly don't have time to do my own research on the topic at the moment.
Crosstieger Posted December 19, 2017 Posted December 19, 2017 Here in Germany we make a difference between freeware and shareware. Freeware: A Eula display before the download is valid, if there is a obvious "I agree" and "I don't agree" button. It's a bit controversial if the Eula is displayed during the installation, because the user is forced to download and execute the software before agreeing to the Eula.Shareware: The end-user agrees to the Eula by buying the software. Therefore a Eula screen during the installation is invalid. And a little bonus: In Germany a Eula is only valid if the user understands the content with ease. Basically it must be written in German :cool:
Genamine Posted December 19, 2017 Posted December 19, 2017 On 12/19/2017 at 5:40 PM, Crosstieger said: Here in Germany we make a difference between freeware and shareware. Freeware: A Eula display before the download is valid, if there is a obvious "I agree" and "I don't agree" button. It's a bit controversial if the Eula is displayed during the installation, because the user is forced to download and execute the software before agreeing to the Eula.Shareware: The end-user agrees to the Eula by buying the software. Therefore a Eula screen during the installation is invalid. And a little bonus: In Germany a Eula is only valid if the user understands the content with ease. Basically it must be written in German :cool: The world is a bit bigger than just Germany, though Were talking about digital content here, which is on a world-wide scaleThat alone already complicates things a lot, combined with the fact its digital goods and not material goods Then lastly there is the fact that if taken to court, the matter isnt looked at as black and white, theres a lot of grey areasThe court handles these things different per each case and the outcome depends on a lot more than just two or three things
Recommended Posts