Comments on: The shame of Microsoft’s Media Center EULA

By: DustyTrigger

DustyTrigger — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 01:27:47 +0000

Should have read as EULAlyzer (I left out the “y”).
It has helped me examine long and complex EULA’s.

By: DustyTrigger

DustyTrigger — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 02:21:25 +0000

Try using the free ELUAlzer 2.0 by JavaCool (it simplifies searching ELUA’s for pitfalls):
http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/eulalyzer.html
Freeware download from:
http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/eulalyzerdl.html

By: josh

josh — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:20:11 +0000

And no, its not entrapment because you CHOOSE NOT to read it. Sure, that’s not fair, but life isn’t fair. You should have learned this when you were in school. Moving on….

By: josh

josh — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:18:37 +0000

Ok, typically I just do a drive-by scan and move on to the next slashdot article but the comments forced me to stop. Yes, the EULA is fubar’d. Yes, it could have been presented better. Yes someone should kick M$ for it. No, there isn’t anything you can do about it. No, the iTunes EULA isn’t better. All operating systems suck, it just depends on what level of sucky you can tolerate while dealing with the features you want.

By: Jeux

Jeux — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:48:30 +0000

I usually don’t post on Blogs but ya forced me to, great info.. excellent! … I will add and bookmark your site.

By: JohnAHind

JohnAHind — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:52:28 +0000

Regardless of whether the EULA needs to be this long, it is ridiculous UI design to present it on the large-text interface. But that is true of Media Centre as a whole – just try editing your channel line-up on that interface!

This product needs a composite interface with only the everyday viewing functions on the large-text interface and the rest in standard PC form.

While they are about it MS should merge Media Centre and Media Player into one app with two interfaces. You ought to be able to play TV on Media Player as well.

By: Charles Marsh

Charles Marsh — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:20:48 +0000

I think the word entrapment may be over egging it, if only because there’s no such concept in English law. As Steve Cassidy has pointed out, it’s more likely to be detrimental to Microsoft. If a court were to decide the Terms of Service were unreasonably difficult to read because of layout, Microsoft wouldn’t be able to rely on them. Of course, that wouldn’t stop a consumer using any part against Microsoft.

All I can now think of is the Monty Python ‘String’ sketch. Due to bad planning, the 1311-word Terms of Service is in 19-word lengths.

By: Stu M

Stu M — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 13:15:39 +0000

I think PC Pro is great, but I do tire of JH’s constant MS-bashing and Apple suckering. Given the current ’status of evil’ I’d sooner it was the other way round.

By: jon honeyball

jon honeyball — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 12:50:56 +0000

Umm of course its a rant piece. “Posted in: Rant” is a clue!

As for MS bashing — its an MS EULA, hence MS are the target.

If Joe’s Software Farm had done it, it would have received exactly the same treatment.

And not, its not up to me to come up with a better solution. Thats up to Microsoft. Cos its their EULA (see a pattern emerging here?)

By: Steve Cassidy

Steve Cassidy — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 12:34:49 +0000

I’d go with accusatory, but I would like to see your logic for “misleading”. Either the EULA is like that; or, it’s not.