LogFAQs > #941458200

helIy posted...

this is why a lot of games are now presenting the eula as the first thing that appears when you start the game.

some are even doing that annoying thing where you can't agree to it until you scroll through the whole thing.

Even doing that, though, the consumer is only being presented with the agreement after the point of sale. The actual sale of the game is the significant point at which any contract should be agreed to, since after that the choice is between accepting it or being left with a $60 coaster and you can very easily argue that's not a fully consensual agreement. Full refunds on opened games are pretty uncommon, so I don't think treating those as a third option is overly realistic. If the user is never given the option to back out of the agreement without losing anything other than the license they're agreeing to, they haven't been properly given a chance to agree to it.

Zeus posted...

lolwut? They entered into an AGREEMENT with the artists to use their music. There's zero parallel.

And once that agreement expires, the publisher no longer has permission to use the music, making it the same as any other use of an IP without permission. The only significant distinction between that and copyright trolling is that the artist has legitimately created something they intend to capitalize on instead of just squatting on a patent they have no intention of ever actually using outside of lawsuits. The fundamental logic is the same, the difference arises in the determination of what it means to have a legitimate claim to an IP (which is subjective, though most examples are obvious enough that that interpretation is going to be universal enough that its subjectivity doesn't matter).

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.