Die Telekomtochter T-Mobil probiert es jetzt mit einer, dem Bildungsniveau der Kundschaft angepassten Offerte: Anstatt drei Seiten voller kleingedruckter Vertragsklauseln, schafft es der Hausjurist der Magenta-Bande plötzlich, einen Mobilfunkvertrag unter 50 Wörtern zu formulieren und mir per sms zu schicken. Na also, geht doch, freut sich der unbekümmerte Kommunikationsjunkie.

Erst gestern habe ich auf meinem Computer diverse Verschlimmbesserungen funktionierender Programme installiert (ist das eigentlich ein von Informatikern in Gang gesetzter Teufelskreis? Software A wird verändert, Software B braucht dann auch ein Update um weiter zu funktionieren, worauf Software C auch einer kleinen Änderung unterzogen werden muss, was wiederum Software A nicht passt, aber das kann man ja im nächsten Update ändern…). Doch bevor es richtig losgeht mit der Belegung zusätzlichen Speicherplatzes durch Updates, erfreuen uns die wortgewaltigen Endbenutzer-Lizenzverträge, auch EULA genannt. Ich stelle mir das als einen der traurigsten Jobs für Juristen vor, diese langen Texte zu verfassen, die nur dann gelesen werden, wenn ein böser, böser Softwarenutzer ohne gültige Lizenz vor ein Gericht gezerrt wird.

Kurze Vertragstexte könnten vielleicht ein echter Neuanfang in der Beziehung zwischen Kunde und Anbieter sein. Aber wie soll ich die “3000″ in meinem SMS-Vertragstext deuten? Glaubt der Vertriebsprofi von T-Mobile, ich gehöre zu dem Teil der Menschheit, der zwar telefonieren kann aber mit “XXX” unterschreibt? Wäre nicht wenigstens ein “JA ich will!” angemessen? Mir ist eine schlichte Nummer einfach zu blöd für einen 24 Monate dauernden und 238.80 EUR schweren Handschlag.

Die Schlangen voller von Teenies vor den Schuldnerzentralen werden mit diesen Offerten bestimmt noch ein Stück länger.

It’s a been a fun ride, but it looks like Psystar’s quixotic efforts to let users install OS X on non-Apple hardware (or buy Apple clones) are pretty much over.  To refresh, Psystar (which is oddly reviled among the digerati, who are not known for their love of DRM and locked-down content) …

…

… You know what?  Groklaw’s got a great writeup.  Why I don’t I just let you mosey on over there for the info.

(I resisted the urge to make the headline read: “Hulu EULA meant ta fool ya?”  You’re welcome.)

I’m aware that some people have raised an eyebrow at a portion of section 2 of the Hulu Desktop application’s EULA, where it states (in part):

2. Permitted License Uses and Restrictions. Hulu grants you a license to install and use the Hulu Software on your personal laptop or desktop computer (“Personal Computer”) for the sole purpose of streaming content that is available on Hulu’s site located at www.hulu.com (“Hulu Content”) on your Personal Computer. You may not download, install or use the Hulu Software on any device other than a Personal Computer including without limitation digital media receiver devices (such as Apple TV), mobile devices (such as a cell phone device, mobile handheld device or a PDA), network devices or CE devices (collectively “Prohibited Devices”). You may not use any hardware, software or service other than the Hulu Software to stream, re-encode, project or transmit Hulu Content. …

But, that is not the part that concerns me.  I’m far more concerned about section 5, which states:

5. Consent to Use of Data. You agree that Hulu and its subsidiaries may collect and use technical and related information about your computer, including but not limited to system and application software and peripherals that you use to access the Services. This information is gathered to facilitate the provision of software updates, product support, and other services to you (if any) related to the Hulu Software. Hulu may use this information to improve our products or to provide services or technologies to you. (Emphasis Added)

First of all, why should I be required to tell Hulu anything at all about my computer?  Is this so they have a way to enforce the restrictions in Section 2? While this paragraph would concern me even without the inclusion of any “weasel words,” including the words “but not limited to” seems to change the entire tone of that paragraph. Let me put it this way: If you happen to read down this far, what I suspect they want your eyes to see is something like this:

You agree that Hulu (blah, blah) may collect and use technical and related information about your computer (blah, blah) software and peripherals that you use to access the Services. …

And that alone ought to put you on your guard, but many people wouldn’t notice. But if I am reading correctly (and bear in mind that I Am Not A Lawyer), what I think this really means is more along these lines:

You agree that Hulu and its subsidiaries, whoever they are may collect and use any damn thing they want to know about your computer.

So, again if I am reading this correctly, this license in effect gives Hulu and its unnamed subsidiaries blanket permission to take whatever information they can find on your computer.  Now, I have no idea what information they actually look at, but no way in hell would I knowingly give Hulu or anybody else blanket permission to let their software rummage around my computer and “phone home” with anything they happen to find interesting.

I’m really surprised that this hasn’t apparently hasn’t been noticed (yet) by those people who regularly look for this sort of thing.  Anyway, if anyone from Hulu happens to read this, my advice is that you strike Section 5 of your obnoxious EULA. Or, at least run it by someone who understands that users do not intend to give you the keys to their computer (or the right to take the keys at whatever future date you like) simply because you induce them to use your software, and then revise that section to explicitly state what you will collect (with no “weasel words”), and exactly who will have access to that data.

So my question is this: If we have any legal experts in the crowd, does this EULA section seem as offensive to you as it does to me? Or am I just taking this entirely the wrong way?

As for the Hulu Desktop software itself, I cannot comment on whether it’s any good or not, because I’ve never gone past that EULA screen!

Assistive technology doesn’t have to be an “official” Portable App for you to install it on a flash drive, nor does it have to be freeware. (But no, you cannot install Dragon NaturallySpeaking on a flash drive.) It depends primarily on  2 things: the ability to choose the flash drive letter for the install location (creating a folder on the drive if necessary) and, ideally, the option NOT to create any shortcuts on the desktop or start menu. It’s just cleaner that way, though shortcuts won’t hurt anything provided you install from your home computer. However, even after you’ve done this, there is still something you may have to watch out for if you’re trying to use public computers — particularly if those computers are on a queue that assigns you to a random machine, e.g. in a library.

There are 2 main types of licenses when you purchase software: per computer and per user. If you’re going to use your flash drive on a public computer, it’s better if your software has a per user license. This means that the license belongs to you, which in turn means that you can use that software on any computer you operate. The only requirement for using per user software on a flash drive is that when you plug it in, you will need to enter the activation code (and possibly the name you registered it with), so DON’T LOSE THAT. I keep a file on my flash drive containing all of my activation codes, so all I need to do is copy and paste. This step is both necessary and beneficial. It’s necessary because in this setup, nothing gets permanently saved to the registry, which is why you need to activate each time. It’s beneficial for the same reason, especially if you can’t use the same computer each time.

If you have USB software with a license that limits the number of computers you can activate on, trying to use different computers becomes dodgy if not impossible. Shades of per-computer enter here, because the program has to count the installation on each machine. When you activate computer-specific software, it saves that activation to the registry — or at least tries to — so that each time you plug your flash drive into that computer, you can run the software without activating. This is problematic on public machines for a couple of reasons.

First, depending on the security settings of the public computer you’re trying to use, it may not like your attempts to modify the registry by activating the software. The software may thus crash or otherwise not run properly. I suspect this is what happened with Typing Assistant, and is partially why I sought other software. Typing Assistant limits its USB version to 3 computers. Even if you get the software to run properly, that kind of license assumes that you’ll always be able to use the same 3 computers. This does not allow for use in, say, a library where you are assigned to available machines at random. You will not always get the same 3 machines. Therefore, you will most likely be out of luck, which kind of defeats the purpose of portable software.

Per computer license agreements are almost always specified at the outset, so that you can decide if that works for your circumstances. Sometimes, per user licenses are also specified, but sometimes they aren’t. For example, I didn’t know Turbo Type had a good, portable per user license until I copied the program folder to my flash drive and tried to use it a couple of times stick typing on friends’ machines, and was pleasantly surprised. It may be that per user licenses are a given unless otherwise specified, but I would be careful in making that assumption. The best thing to do is try the demo of your program, if one exists, because it will usually explain the license to you in case you want to buy it when your time is up.

While it was relatively fresh in my mind I wanted to recap the intellectual property (IP) rights lecture today, err, yesterday…

* * * NOTICE: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice! * * *

It is important to understand the basics of IP so you don’t get yourself or your employer into legal trouble, if you can help it.

Once a creative idea is expressed into fixed form, it is protected by copyright. Copyrights are a bundle of rights, including the right to make copies (reproduce) and the right to make derivative works. When a copyright expires, it enters the public domain. Factual information cannot be copyrighted. The federal government cannot hold copyright. Check out the US Copyright Office website, including this great PDF on copyright basics.

In a few situations, you can use copyrighted works without permission. It’s called “fair use.” I mentioned a great source of info on fair use, which is no longer active but discovered it can be accessed via the internet archive. I highly recommend reading this site, especially the discussion of the four factors used in determining fair use.

In article 1 section 8, copyright protection was written into the Constitution. Then President George Washington signed the first copyright act into law in 1790 (H.R. 10). It was modeled on Britain’s Statute of Anne. The first U.S. copyright term was 14 years + 14 years renewal. In 1831 it was extended to 28 years with a 14 year renewal. Copyright first protected only literary works. Art works were not protected until 1870. Other revisions to the law have taken place through the years, including what can be protected and extensions of the term. In 1978, it was life (of the author) + 50 (years). In 1998, the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act extended it to life + 70, and even more for corporate copyright owners thanks to heavy lobbying by Disney. There is a nice timeline of important milestones of copyright here. And you can try to make sense of the terms of protection with the handy chart here.

Whereas copyright means “all rights reserved,” there is a “some rights reserved” alternative, and that is Creative Commons. Respect the terms, be it attribution, share alike, noncommercial, no derivatives, etc. If you weren’t in class, watch the video!

Some things cannot be copyrighted but they can be trademarked. Trademark (and service mark) protection is meant to differentiate in the marketplace, and can be registered ® for full legal benefit. It is meant to protect against unfair competition and to be identifiable to consumers. Here is a brief description. And more here. Trademarks must not only be registered, but must be continuously used in commerce and vigorously defended against marauders in order to be enforceable in the courts. Product shape, packaging, and color may also be protected under trade dress. This is a great primer on trade dress and this is an interesting legal blog illustrating just how many suits are filed on this kind of thing. Regarding one example we discussed in class, here is the Wikipedia entry on Tiffany Blue.

So when you work on a project that combines artistic or creative elements, start by assuming that everything already created is copyright protected, and that you must seek permission and/or pay a fee to do anything with it. And even then you’re not buying it, you’re licensing a use of it. As designers, this especially means type (in the form of digital fonts) and image (either photography or illustration). Here are some usage arrangements to be aware of:

FOR TYPE

• Assignment: custom creations priced per situation
• Commercial: pay to use (based on number of devices)
• Shareware: pay to use, on the honor system
• Free, for commercial use
• Free, for personal use

Note, some fonts are licensed along with the operating systems of your computer, or your software packages. Sometimes fonts are bundled with a book, but you still must read the license as these are frequently only for personal use. Examples include the Indie Fonts series of three books.

Different foundries have different terms regarding the number of devices the font can reside on, as well as restrictions for PDF embedding and sending to a printer or service bureau. It’s a good idea to become familiar with the license from each foundry you buy fonts from. Don’t be like the alleged designers at NBC!

Takeaway: Know the terms, read the End User License Agreement (EULA), do not share fonts.

FOR IMAGE

• Assignment: custom creations priced per situation
• Rights-managed stock: priced by usage (size, location in piece, quantity, geographical scope)
• Royalty-free stock: priced by size and provenance
• Creative Commons: some rights reserved
• Public Domain

Takeaway: Know the terms, read the End User License Agreement (EULA), do not share files.

I found this little book, 101 Questions About Copyright Law to be helpful to the lay person (me) for a straight read-through, and of course, The Graphic Artists Guild Handbook is an invaluable resource for all things professional, including an understandable discussion of copyright.

Poiché in un molto prossimo futuro in casa entrerà un nuovo pc, e poiché il tempo (e la voglia) di provare e smanettare non è più come non è mai stato, insomma, facciamola breve: sto cercando informazioni su Windows 7, uscito proprio oggi.

In ufficio abbiamo installato una versione Pro in inglese a 64 bit. A occhio sembra più veloce e meno esoso del papà Vista, ma questa è solo un’impressione. Ci sono però due cose che mi hanno colpito:

1) Non è più possibile ridurre il desktop di 7 al tradizionale Windows 2000. Era possibile farlo fino a Vista, ora non più. O forse non ancora, vedremo. Probabilmente siamo in pochi ad essere ancorati alle vecchie tradizioni, ma alla Microsoft non hanno pensato a noi pigri nostalgici: andare a cercare in giro per i menu, le combinazioni di tasti e i click, tutte le cose che usavamo prima è una gran perdita di tempo. A me non interessano i ribbon, i suoni cool (la prima cosa che disabilito), gli sfondi mozzafiato (ho io uno sfondo mozzafiato), le cornici semitrasparenti con le sfumature di colore e i colori pastello, i preview nella task bar (pericolosissimi al lavoro!) e l’interfaccia Aero (seconda cosa che disabilito). Potrei continuare a lungo, ma mi fermo qui. Il nuovo avanza e presto mi dovrò riadattare.

2) L’EULA non è stata pubblicata, ad oggi. (L’EULA è la licenza d’uso del software, è scritta in legalese ed è chiara come un testo di fisica nucleare scritto in etrusco.)  Siamo quattro gatti che leggiamo l’EULA nell’acquisto di un software. Ma dopo che la Microsoft si fa in quattro per insegnarci che il software legale è importante, eccetera, il minimo che uno si aspetta è che, prima di acquistare il software, mi faccia leggere le condizioni di licenza. Non è così. Prima paghi, poi vedi. Se qualcuno di voi recupera l’EULA di Windows 7 Home Premium Ita, retail (FPP) e/o OEM e me la spedisce, grazie in anticipo. Perché tutto questo interesse? Cercavo informazioni sulla clausola Family Pack in Italia, che in Svizzera sembra ci sia già. Questa clausola mi permetterebbe di acquistare una sola copia di W7 e di installarla sui miei due pc di casa, portatile e fisso, magari una a 64 e l’altra a 32 bit. Vado a chiedere a Guglielmo Cancelli. (Dimenticavo: l’EULA della versione che abbiamo in ufficio è per ufficio, ovviamente, ed è in inglese. A me serve quella per persone normali, in italiano.)

Buona installazione!

Aggiornamento 23/10/2009:
Mi correggo: il vero problema del desktop di Windows 7 è il menu avvio. Perché cambiarlo? Perché non lasciare – almeno! – la vecchia versione?

Aggiornamento 27/10/2009:
Ora potete scaricare la vostra licenza prima dell’acquisto. Vi invito a leggerla, che si imparano sempre cose interessanti. Se non la capite o se le cose scritte vi sembrano assurde, non siete voi in difetto: è così che la Microsoft vuole le sue licenze.

Se qualche scelta vi sembra strana, per esempio menù (inutilmente) spostati, funzionalità non più presenti o nuove funzionalità inutili, ricordatevi le parole di Fabrizio Albergati, responsabile per Microsoft Italia di Windows nel mercato consumer: “Noi non vendiamo più software. Noi vendiamo un’esperienza“. Per chi volesse approfondire il concetto c’è Apogeonline: Molto più di un prodotto: un’intera esperienza, di Luca Rosati e Andrea Resmini.

Microsoft Store mi ha confermato che in Italia il Family Pack non è previsto. Non mi hanno detto se e quando lo prevederanno.

Qui alcuni articoli di recensione. (vai alla seconda pagina per i link)

It is a melancholy object to those who walk through the virtual streets of the internet, to see poor subscribers to online games who occupy a prodigious amount of discussions on many a prestigious forum endlessly gripe about “rights” to which entitlement should be granted by subscription to such online games.  These complaints substantially deteriorate the quality of the great internet environment in which so many participate.  These complainers, who know nothing of the law, who want nothing more than to sew unrest, and whose silver tongues are laced with poison of co-creation and open source, are a grave threat to profit; and, therefore, whoever could find out a fair, cheap and easy method of making these “End-Users” sound, useful members of the internet, would deserve so well of the public as to have his statue set up for a preserver of the nation.

As to my own part, having turned my thoughts for many hours upon this subject, I believe I have come up with a useful solution.  The title of “End-User”, though possibly accompanied by respect and prestige in their respective virtual realms, where meaningless prizes and titles may be won toiling  away for hours on end, necessitates a particular lack of physical activity or productiveness in reality, typically resulting in a certain lack of physical shapeliness.  For casual End-Users the effects may be less pronounced, however still present.  While this lack of physique may be scorned in the mainstream media, I embrace those of this physical stature as pivotal in my proposal.

I have been assured by a very knowing colleague of mine at Blizzard, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked or boiled.  And I have undertaken extensive research that shows, coincidentally, that the physical stature of a frequent and habitual End-User is remarkably similar to such a child, and that preparation of such sustenance is indeed delicious and nourishing.  This natural resource we have yet to tap is just waiting for some industrious type to come along and procure its obvious benefits.  Any corporation willing to undertake the following method would effectively crush any dissention, provide sustenance to the families of America and increase its customer satisfaction ratings by untold exponential results.

The first step to be made by any ingenuous corporation would be to encourage their End-Users to willingly, or ironically by agreement in a EULA, submit themselves for beta testing or other promotional activity requiring the End-Users to relocate themselves to a testing facility owned by the corporation.  The corporation should make the End-User feel either that he is being included in a special event, access to which would give him something he thinks he will be able take home and shout in the virtual streets, or, for those less enthusiastic End-Users, that he has an obligation beyond challenge in court to participate in this event by the signing of the EULA.  Once relocated, the End-Users of proper stature for the preparation of nourishing food can be immediately taken care of.  The End-Users of a less desirable fitness (those casual End-Users previously mentioned), however, can be contained in the facility and made to play the game, spending time and money on the game while they ripen to the proper physical stature.  Those corporations that are more thrifty (as I must confess the times require) can use the inedible parts for other handy uses and flay the carcass; the skin of which artificially dressed will make admirable gloves for ladies, and summer boots for fine gentlemen.  The corporation will be able to sell any excess food that its workers and their families do not consume.

Any corporation willing to follow these humble recommendations will most certainly find itself in a sea of profit and will swell with pride at the customer satisfaction ratings it receives.

Tyler Gilcrest

(Jonathan Swift + Satire = Win)

A little over a week ago, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) made its final ruling on a consent order against Sears for deceptive trade practices.  Visitors to the Sears website were given the opportunity to download and install software that would allow them to interact more closely with Sears, in return for a $10 coupon – it turned out that the software tracked their computer usage and browsing habits and reported this information back to Sears.

Naturally, Sears wasn’t installing tracking software “willy-nilly” on customer computers.  Customers were presented with End User Licence Agreements (EULAs) that described the tracking capabilities of the software. By virtue of the customers clicking “I agree”, they were essentially opting-in to the tracking.  However, the FTC argued that placing this information about tracking at line 75 of a EULA in a scrollbox that only showed 10 lines did not adequately inform the consumer.

What I find more interesting than the consent order itself is the comments made prior to the final ruling.  Both the American Insurance Association and Sidley Austin, LLP expressed concerns that the FTC ruling would diminish the validity of EULAs as a legal mechanism.  The FTC argued that information about the tracking nature of the software needed to be provided over and abouve the extent expressed in the EULA.

But here’s the reality: EULAs are garbage.  Nobody reads them.  When I want to download and use software, I agree to, and expect, the advertised functionality – I don’t read the EULA.  When I started using WordPress, they advertised a browser extension called Gears that would allow the interface to work faster – that was the functionality I needed and wanted, so I downloaded it and installed it without thinking twice about the EULA.  Gears could be slowly deleting my personal files for all I know.

And so what if I did read the EULA – it’s all legal mumbo-jumbo anyways.  I’ve got a Ph.D. and I still find them complex.  Imagine someone without a high-school education: do we expect them to seek legal counsel everytime they want to add an app to their Facebook account (which brings us back the Canadian Privacy Commissioner’s Facebook investigation)?  Not going to happen.

Privacy policies have gotten better at communicating information practices with the consumer (go read Apple’s), so why can’t EULAs do better as well.  Describe example scenarios.  Use pictures.  Create videos in which a real live human explain what you agree to before using the software.  If you can force someone to scroll to the bottom of a EULA before they can agree, then you can also force them to run the video too.

EULAs are complicated because they are made by lawyers who need to protect the manufacturer; the legal profession has existed for millenia (in one form or another) and can’t see beyond the “legal document”.  Privacy policies started out full of legalese because many of the earliest privacy professionals came from the legal profession; fortunately, the privacy profession is only decades old, so it has been able to shift the focus of privacy policies such that they better serve the consumer.

The FTC was right: they aren’t diminishing the validity of the EULA – EULAs can’t have validity if nobody reads them in the first place.  The masses have already spoken.

DM

Short form of EULALIA

(Behind the name)

EULA nedir ? Bize Ne Kazandirir ?

EULA nedir ?

EULA veya İngilizce açılımıyla End-User License Agreement (Son Kullanıcı Lisans Anlaşması) kullanıcının haklarını koruyan sıradan, bürokratik bir söz-leşmeymiş gibi görünebilir. Aslında temel olarak EULA, kullanacağınız yazılımla ilgili gerekli yasal zorunlulukların hatırlatıldığı bir metindir. EULA genellikle yazılımı kurmadan önce önünüze getirilir ve kabul ettiğinizi belirtmek için metnin altındaki küçük bir bir “>kutuyu işaretlemeniz istenir. Yasalar karşısında bu, bir kâğıdın altına imza atmanızla eşdeğerdir çünkü o “kabul ediyorum” yazan küçük kutucuğu işaretlemeden yazılımın kurulmasına izin verilmez. Çoğu zaman da uzun “>metni okuduğunuzu garantilemek için o uzun metni fare ile tutarak başından sonuna kadar indirmeniz gerekir ki ancak o işlemden sonra metni okuduğunuzu ve şartları kabul ettiğinizi yazan küçük kutucuğa ulaşabilirsiniz. Ancak genel olarak EULA, bürokratik bir zorunlulukmuş gibi görünse de, aslında yazılım şirketinin haklarını koruyan maddelerle doludur ve bir gün yazılım şirketini mahkemeye vermeniz ha- j linde imzaladığınız bu uzun doküman- | daki şartlar karşınıza konulup, bir hak } talep edemeyeceğiniz hatırlatılır.

EULA neden okunmalı ?

EULA metinlerini okumanın kullanıcıya sağladığı en büyük avantaj, yazılımın kullanılması sırasında oluşan pek çok soruya cevap veriyor oluşu. Örneğin pek çok kullanıcı bir yazılım satın aldığında aslında yazılım satın almadığını,sadece o yazılımı kullanma lisansı aldığını bilmez. Oysa yazılımın mülkiyeti ve onun üzerinden gerçekleşecek her türlü alışverişin, yazılımın kodlarının hakları hala yazılımı geliştiren veya dağıtan fırmaya aittir ve kullanıcı belirli veya belirsiz bir süre için yazılımı kullanamaya izin almıştır.

Elbette EULA metnini okumanın aslı önemli nedeni, kişisel bilgilerinizi ve özel hayatınıza dair detayları kullanmaya izin verip vermediğinizi tespit etmektir. Bu tür firmaların kullanıcıların internetteki sörf alışkanlıklarını, girip çıktıkları siteleri öğrenmek için kullandıklan metotları mutlaka duymuş olmalısınız. İşte EULA metnini okumak böyle kurnaz bir yazılımla karşı karşıya olup olmadığınızı anlamak ve bilgisayarınıza yüklenecek casus yazılımların farkına varmanız için önemlidir.

Tüm bunların ötesinde, bedava yazıhm kullandığınızı sanarak bilgisayara yüklediğiniz bir yazılımla gelen casus yazılımlar veya reklâm yazılımları, sabit diskinizden, hafızanızdan, değerli internet bağlantınızın bant genişliğinden ve diğer PC kaynaklarınızdan sömüren zararlı bir virüs gibi çalışır. Hatta bazı zamanlar farkında olmadan yüklediğiniz casus yazılımlar internet bağlantınızın ve işlemci gücünüzün uzaktan kontrol edilen işlemler için kullanılmasına, sağa sola yığın postalar göndermek için kullanılmasına bile yol açabilir. Bu açıkça, ticari bir faaliyet için çalışan birilerinin ihtiyaç duyduğu sermayeyi sizin ödemeniz anlamına gelir. İnternet ücretinizle, elektrik paranızla, sabrınızla hatta sağlığınızla…

Üstelik bazı EULA metinler o kadar zekice hazırlanmıştır ki, kullanıcıların karşılaştıkları sorunlara çözüm arama yollarını bile tıkamayı başarır. Örneğin Amerika’da bir müşterinin Gateway isimli firmayı, satın aldığı bilgisayarın sorunlu çıkması ve firmanın zayıf teknik desteği yüzünden uğradığı zarı telafi için mahkemeye vermesiyle, EULA metinlerinin önemi bir kez daha kanıtlamıştır. Firma kullanıcıya EULA olarak imzalattığı formda, ortaya çıkacak sorunların, itilafların mahkeme yolu ile değil müşteri ve firma arasında kişisel anlaşmalarla çözüleceğini yazdığı için kullanıcı hakkını ararken ciddi sorunlarla karşılaşmıştır.

EULA nerede?

Yazılımı kurarken veya bir web sitesine üye olurken EULA metnini okumadan aceleyle kurulumu gerçekleştirdiniz ve daha sonra ne imzaladığınızı görmek için EULA metnini tekrar mı okumak istiyorsunuz? Yazılımı tekrar kurmak veya web sitesine yeniden üye olmak zorunda değilsiniz. Web sitelerinde genellikle “Terms” bölümü altında kullanıcılara imzalatılan sözleşmenin bir kopyası bulunur. Eğer bir yazılımın EULA metnini arıyorsanız genellike yazılımın kutuşu içinde EULA metninin kâğıda basılı halini bulabilir, kolaylıkla inceleyebilirsiniz. Kâğıt kopyayı bulamadığınız vakitte ise programı kaydettiğiniz klasörde, dosyaların arasında bir text dosyasında, ya da yazılımın “Help” menüsü içinde lisans sözleşmesinin bir kopyasını bulmak mümkün olabilir. Ama yine de bulamıyorsanız, yazılımın Install seçeneğini tekrar çalıştırarak zaten ilk ekranlardan birinde karşınıza çıkacak EULA metnini okuyabilir, sonra kurulumu devam ettirmeden çıkabilirsiniz.

Yapabileceklerimiz…

Güzel haber şu ki, bu kadar tehlikeli metinler olmalarında rağmen kullandığınız her yazılım, üye olduğunuz her site için paranoyakça korkulara kapılıp, teknolojinin sizin özel hayatınızı izleyip zarar vermek üzere pusuya yatmış bir düşman olduğunu düşünmenize gerek yok.
Tek yapmanız gereken web sitelerine veya yazılımlara kişisel bilgilerinizi girerken iki kez düşünmek. Yaşamınızı gizli ajanlar gibi yaşamak zorunda değilsiniz elbette ama internette karşılaştığınız her sorgu kutucuğuna gerçek isminizi, doğum tarihinizi, adresinizi, kişisel detaylarınızı yazmak zorunda değilsiniz. Karşınıza çıkan her yedi sayfalık EULO metnini kelime kelime okumaya kalktığınızda hayatın çok zor olacağını kabul etmek gerekiyor.
Ancak gerçekten önemli bir yazılım kurduğunuzda veya ciddi bir siteye üye olup, özel bilgilerinizi eksiksiz girmeye kalktığınızda EULA metinlerine de göz atmanız önemlidir. Ayrıca CHIP DVD’sinde bulabileceğiniz EULAyzer isimli yazılım da küçük programları kurarken sizi sayfa sayfa lisans sözleşmesini okumaktan kurtaracaktır.

Dikkat kazandırır

EULA metinlerini okumak için güzel bir neden daha. Bir süre önce PC Pits-top isimli firma EULA metinlerine eklediği bir satırla, anlaşmayı okuyup kendilerine geri dönecek kullanıcılara 1.000 dolar ödeyeceğini vaat ediyordu. Bunun için kullanıcının EULA adresinde belirtilen e-posta adresine bir mektup göndermesi yeterli olacaktı ancak yazılım üç bin kez indirilmesine rağmen bir kişi bile anlaşmayı okuyup mektup göndermedi. Sonunda, yazılımın yayınlanmasından dört ay sonra sadece bir kullanıcı ödülü fark edip e-posta gönderdi ve yazılımın üreticisinden bin dolarını aldı.

Yapabilir miyim ?

EULA metinlerini okumak, bir yazılım satın aldıktan veya bir web hizmetine kayıt yaptırdıktan sonra aşağıdaki şu sorulara yanıt bulmanızı sağlamaktadır.
- Bu yazılıma eklenmiş olan fontları, grafikleri ve diğer dosyaları başka projelerde ve tasarımlarda kullanabilir miyim?
- Eğitim lisansı ile alınmış bir yazılımı daha sonra ticari bir projede kullanabilir miyim?
- Yazılımı birden fazla bilgisayara kurabilir miyim?
- Yeni bir sürümü satın aldıktan sonra eski sürümleri kullanmaya devam edebilir miyim?
- Satın aldığım yazılımla ürettiğin işleri ekstra bir ücret ödemeden dağıtabilir miyim?

alıntı :http://ust-karakter.blogspot.com/2008/04/eula-nedir-bize-ne-kazandirir.html

The Champions Online Open Beta is over. I’ve posted my comments in the Beta Forums. Before I say anything else, let me say that I’ve cancelled my subscriptions to two other MMOs in the expectation that I will only play Champions Online when it launches. I had that much fun in the Open Beta.

Meanwhile, people are talking about Bioware’s MMO, Star Wars: The Old Republic, and how much voiceover it will use.

Those two things got me thinking about MMO features. What follows are my opinions. When they are comments on a specific game, I’ve cited that game’s title. Don’t assume a comment with no attribution is about a specific game.

Must Have

You have to support voice chat in your MMO. Work out a deal with Ventrilo or some other service, but get it in your game. Voice chat is built into several games now, including World of Warcraft. It’s now expected.

You must have a wiki. Not only for story information, but for how to play the game. You can launch the story portion prior to game launch, as a marketing tool, but the game mechanics side should launch with the game. If you’re not simultaneous, someone will steal your thunder and wikis are a case where first-to-market matters.

You need in-game web access. No, not just so players can order pizza. You want to set up a web portal, which accesses your wiki, your online store (especially if you’re using micro-transactions), and your forums. You can make it as difficult as you like to navigate away from those sites, as long as getting to them is easy in the game. This portal should be expandable, in case you form a licensing partnership with someone like Dominos, or J!nx.

You must have strong social tools in the game. There are two aspects to this. First, we want good reasons to team up. Maybe missions require characters of different roles or backgrounds or specializations to complete them. City of Heroes and City of Villains (COX, collectively) run holiday events, for example, where heroes and villains have to team up to complete quests. Second, we want teaming up to be easy. Forming teams and building friend lists should be easy. Rejoining a team part way through a quest should be simple, if not automatic. Eliminate everything that stands in the way of socializing in the game.

You must have strong instancing. I played an MMO where my team finished a quest, left the quest map, and each member wound up in a separate instance of the game world. That’s something that stands in the way of socializing in the game.

Want

We want in-game social media access. Let us update Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, or any number of other sites (you can start with just a few and expand over time, of course) from inside the game. Let us control the updates. Don’t automate them (my least favorite feature of Tweetcraft, and the reason I uninstalled it), but do include a button with each accomplishment pop-up that allows the player to broadcast it if he (or she) wants to.

Give us global (across server) user names, so we can e-mail our friends across servers. In fact, give us the option of sending standard e-mail from within the game.

We want to sort our quests, and control how the game tracks them. In other words, we want to be able to sort by level, or geographic proximity; and we want to be able to mask out missions in zones other than the one we’re in. It’s okay if the default display and sort is everything, in the order acquired. Just as long as we can customize it. We want to be able to sort quest givers the same way.

We want to change the world. We want our actions to have a persistent impact. Champions Online makes a stab at it, with the way different zones show the same geographic locations before we complete a story arc and after.

We want mobile access to the game. Giving us social media is a good start, because most of us already update social media via our mobile devices. Even if we’re just managing inventory or scheduling a raid, we want mobile access. Let us check our characters’ e-mail via mobile devices. Keep us involved with your game when we’re away from our computers.

We want to see you get tough with spammers, gold farmers, and griefers. We don’t care that you posted a tough policy on your website or in the EULA (End-User Licensing Agreement). We want to know that you’re enforcing it.

Just Stop

A characteristic of MMOs at this stage is repetition. You spend lots of time in the same places, with the same NPCs, while you get e-mail, shop, and initiate quests. Voiceover dialogue, as a result, will be heard over and over. Congratulations, you just spent a boatload of money on a feature that annoys your players. Just stop the voiceover madness.

Sophie- Sadie, Susannah, Soraya, Milena, Anne, Diana, Fiona, Phoebe,

Fifi, Solenne, Maeve, Zofiel.

Olivia- Olive, Olympia, Aurelia, Liviya, Lydia, Ottilie, Otylia, Ophelia,

Oralia, Indira, Ocean, Claudia, Orabel.

Ella- Ada, Eula, Arella, Eliana, Elle, Giselle, Eleora, Eleanora, Phila, Cleo,

Ailis, Ivah, Opal, Moselle, Adele, Orla, Astra, Aello.

Isabella- Isadora, Isis, Mehitabel, Antonia, Bellamy, Tallulah, Ellen,

Allegra, Nellie, Sybella, Isabeau, India, Ismay.

Charlotte- Tabitha, Beatrix, Augusta, Cecilia, Celeste, Audrey, Bathsheba,

Francesca, Gloria, Caroline, Katherine, Philippa, Margaret.

Harriet/Hariette which do you prefer?

Harriet Lily June/Jane

Harriet Lily Jemima

Harriet Lillian Frances

Harriet Arabella Cate

Harriet Ruby Alice

Harriet Amelia

Harriet Emme

Harriet Mabel

Harriet Aurelia Lily

Harriet Audrey Rose

Harriet Fenella

Harriet Adella Jane

Harriet Eula

Harriet Myrtle

Harriet Rosamund

Harriet Ella Jean

Harriet Ellen Paige

Harriet Caroline

Harriet India Jane

En estaocasión nos limitaremos a leer las condiciones de uso, algo que prueba que los usuarios de la secta 2.0 no prestan mucho atención al contrato de usuario.

Quedan prohibidos cualesquiera recursos técnicos, lógicos o tecnológicos en virtud de los cuales un tercero pueda beneficiarse, directa o indirectamente, con o sin lucro, de los contenidos del Sitio Web. En concreto, salvo que TUENTI así lo hubiera autorizado previa y expresamente, no se podrá insertar un link, hyperlink, framing o vínculo similar en dirección al Sitio Web.

¡No se puede enlazar! Esto junto con la necesidad de invitación para registrarse son las características que lo convierten en la secta más importante para los canis quinceañeros.

El Usuario no podrá en ningún caso explotar o servirse comercialmente, de forma directa o indirecta, total o parcial, ninguno de los contenidos (imágenes, textos, diseño, índices, formas, etc.) que conformen el Sitio Web sin la autorización previa y por escrito de TUENTI.

Es decir, que si a un escritor (pederasta, por supuesto) se le ocurriera poner adelantos de su libro en el TUENTI DE LOS COJONES, no podría luego publicar tal libro. Y ahora viene lo mejor…

El Usuario cede en exclusiva a TUENTI y para todo el mundo los derechos de reproducción, distribución y comunicación pública sobre los contenidos que suministre a través del Sitio Web, así como el de modificación para adaptarlos a las necesidades editoriales de TUENTI, y garantiza además la legítima titularidad o facultad de disposición sobre dichos derechos.

¡Trolenti tendría derecho a publicar el libro! Que una empresa de un californiano que vive en Madid se reserve el derecho de vender a terceros las fotos de tus vacaciones o de tu pedo en los sanfermines da mucho que pensar sobre las intenciones de los líderes maestros de la “oh venerada secta 2.0″.

___________
Mañana el último capítulo…

Summary:  Online advertising has been self-regulated for some time but the FTC has made it clear that it is not happy with the resulting dense legalese of TOU’s and privacy policies.  They set forth new guidelines that they expect publishers to use during the next year–at which time the FTC will consider new legislation.  (Please note:  Various ad industry associations offered their response, which is discussed in the post below at digitaldumonde.wordpress.com/2009/07/23/new-ideas-for-online-data-collection-use-the-industry-responds-to-the-ftc/.)

Although the guidelines are only just that–guidelines–they should “guide” your revisions to your TOU’s and your privacy policy.  Here is a quick summary.

I.  Introduction.

The staff of the United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC)  recently released a report (February 12, 2009) that will directly affect the documents governing the relationship between an online content provider and viewers/consumers-Terms of Use (TOUs), End-User License Agreements (EULAs) and Privacy Policies.  The report also suggests implications for the use of private information.  Please email us atjcrext@globalcaplaw.com and a copy of the report will be sent to you, or you can find it on the site of the FTC.

The report sets forth principles for self-regulation for the online advertising industry relating to online “behavioral advertising.”  (The report defines behavioral advertising, which is set forth below under “Definition”).  Technically, it is a supplemental report, but it has the effect of finalizing the December 2007 draft “Self-Regulatory Principles for Online Behavioral Advertising.”

It should be emphasized that these are principles for self-regulation for the online advertising industry.  Arguably, this means that they are not binding, and, indeed, the report makes that clear. However (and this is an important caveat), the principles will definitely guide the enforcement actions instituted by the FTC.  Moreover, it seems that the FTC is pre-disposed to initiate legislation in this area, which will probably codify much of what is found in these principles.  And states often look to such reports for guidance on their legislation on privacy.

In reading the footnotes, another point emerges from the report.  The FTC staff appears to believe that those who draft TOUs and privacy policies have not been keeping a close eye on the enforcement actions and decisions that the FTC staff believes to be relevant-and these include decisions that do not involve online matters but do involve clear disclosure for consumers.  In fact, the report footnotes include quotes from FTC commissioners that can be summed up as the following rule:

Policies that bury relevant information and choices for consumers in legalese will do so at the peril of the publisher.

(Please note that the above rule is our language and not that of the FTC or its staff.)

II.  So What?

1.  Clean up These Documents. Dense legalese will probably not “pass muster” with the FTC.  They are keeping a close eye on this area.

2.  Consumers’ Choices Must Be Clear. Just as dense legalese is for the FTC tantamount to unacceptable (and often illegal) “fine print,” obscuring consumers’ choices is frowned upon.  In particular, the report mentions “check boxes” that are already checked–something frowned upon in the report.

3.  Certain Changes to Terms Must Be Affirmatively Accepted. Any material changes or “retroactive” changes (i.e., affecting policies on data already collected) must be affirmatively accepted by the site users.  Prospective changes do not (yet) need such approval but it is pretty clear that the staff leans in that direction.  This possibly means that the common technique of saying “Use of this site means acceptance of the terms” together with the “warning” that changes can be made at any time will not be acceptable by the FTC.

4.   The PII/non-PII Distinction is Diminishing. The US approach has been to try to protect “personally identifiable information” at a higher level than that which is not personally identifiable.  This differs from the European model.  Now, the FTC is moving towards the European model and this is understandable.  The staff understands that PII can often be gleaned from non-PII, which makes the distinction too porous.  In particular, the report wishes to increase the protection of data that can identify an individual machine (PC, mobile phone, etc.), while the earlier approach was to preclude identification of an individual user.

5.   Self Regulation is a Testbed and is on Probation. The FTC simply sidestepped resolving many issues, leaving it to the “industry” to try various methods.  However, one can infer that “industry” has about a year before the FTC moves towards legislation.

III.   The Report.

We have not included the entire (50+ page) Report, but we have quoted almost the entire conclusion, which summarizes the final version of the “Principles” of self-regulation.  The numbering is directly from the Report:

A.  Definition

For purposes of the Principles, online behavioral advertising means the tracking of a consumer’s online activities over time – including the searches the consumer has conducted, the web pages visited, and the content viewed – in order to deliver advertising targeted to the individual consumer’s interests. This definition is not intended to include “first party” advertising, where no data is shared with third parties, or contextual advertising, where an ad is based on a single visit to a web page or single search query.

B.  Principles

1.  Transparency and Consumer Control

Every website where data is collected for behavioral advertising should provide a clear, concise, consumer-friendly, and prominent statement that (1) data about consumers’ activities online is being collected at the site for use in providing advertising about products and services tailored to individual consumers’ interests, and (2) consumers can choose whether or not to have their information collected for such purpose. The website should also provide consumers with a clear, easy-to-use, and accessible method for exercising this option.  Where the data collection occurs outside the traditional website context, companies should develop alternative methods of disclosure and consumer choice that meet the standards described above (i.e., clear, prominent, easy-to-use, etc.)

2.  Reasonable Security, and Limited Data Retention, for Consumer Data

Any company that collects and/or stores consumer data for behavioral advertising should provide reasonable security for that data. Consistent with data security laws and the FTC’s data security enforcement actions, such protections should be based on the sensitivity of the data, the nature of a company’s business operations, the types of risks a company faces, and the reasonable protections available to a company.  Companies should also retain data only as long as is necessary to fulfill a legitimate business or law enforcement need.

3.  Affirmative Express Consent for Material Changes to Existing Privacy Promises

As the FTC has made clear in its enforcement and outreach efforts, a company must keep any promises that it makes with respect to how it will handle or protect consumer data, even if it decides to change its policies at a later date. Therefore, before a company can use previously collected data in a manner materially different from promises the company made when it collected the data, it should obtain affirmative express consent from affected consumers.  This principle would apply in a corporate merger situation to the extent that the merger creates material changes in the way the companies collect, use, and share data.

4.  Affirmative Express Consent to (or Prohibition Against) Using Sensitive Data for Behavioral Advertising

Companies should collect sensitive data for behavioral advertising only after they obtain  affirmative express consent from the consumer to receive such advertising.

As I’ve written about in the past, the media is terrible with regard to technology. It would be fine if they were ignorant, but spreading it is the problem. There’s always misinformation abound, and throw in some Fox News and you’ve really got yourself something.

Fox News on the site cars.gov

You’d think they were juggling chainsaws with the disclosures on this. DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME. Congratulations, it’s your first time reading an End-User License Agreement (EULA). In case you didn’t know already, EULAs are always ridiculous. The Chrome EULA originally listed everything you did on the Internet as property of Google. Everything you post on Facebook is property of Facebook. Everything you do anywhere is property of Company X. It’s in nearly every piece of software you’ve ever used.

On the technical end, this specific instance is meaningless. It states that they have full access, but no, they do not have full access. Despite fear-monger central, there isn’t a secret backdoor that lets the evil computer people monitor everything you ever do and all of your files. While there are a disconcertingly high number of unpatched and improperly secured Windows machines out there, it’s not a simply just going through the list of logged in users and taking a peek at their harddrives.

And guess what, no, in general, it’s not really considered legal. The general agreement is that the nature of EULAs are unenforceable and would not stand up in court, though precedence is lacking.