This is the “theory” by which publishers try to justify the validity of EULAs (they argue: “buying the thing isn’t enough; you need to agree to this to be able to actually use it”).
But, fun fact: copyright law has a specific carve-out for that incidental copy, 17 USC §117 (a) (1), which means EULAs offer no ‘consideration’ and are therefore bunk.
I agree, but that’s not how I’d imagine the courts would see it? If the EULA says that you don’t own the computer program, you’re just paying for a license to use it, then you’re not really “the owner of a copy of a computer program”…
In what way would the EULA/contract be illegal/invalid? The US has a pretty broad freedom of contract. No one has forced you to buy that licensed computer program. You don’t need it to survive. You’re not discriminated against by not being allowed to buy the software instead of a license.
Understand I’m playing devil’s advocate here. I agree that such contracts are morally corrupt, but I’m not aware of anything that’d make them illegal. Only by being truthful regarding the current laws is how we can make change.
This is the “theory” by which publishers try to justify the validity of EULAs (they argue: “buying the thing isn’t enough; you need to agree to this to be able to actually use it”).
But, fun fact: copyright law has a specific carve-out for that incidental copy, 17 USC §117 (a) (1), which means EULAs offer no ‘consideration’ and are therefore bunk.
I agree, but that’s not how I’d imagine the courts would see it? If the EULA says that you don’t own the computer program, you’re just paying for a license to use it, then you’re not really “the owner of a copy of a computer program”…
It doesn’t matter what the EULA says when you never agreed to it in the first place because it failed to meet the basic requirements of a contract.
In what way would the EULA/contract be illegal/invalid? The US has a pretty broad freedom of contract. No one has forced you to buy that licensed computer program. You don’t need it to survive. You’re not discriminated against by not being allowed to buy the software instead of a license.
Understand I’m playing devil’s advocate here. I agree that such contracts are morally corrupt, but I’m not aware of anything that’d make them illegal. Only by being truthful regarding the current laws is how we can make change.