Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th Mar 2011 23:21 UTC
Legal Well, how about some positive news to end this day? How about annoying the heck out of the Business Software Alliance? There's a new proposal for a directive on consumer rights in the EU, and in it, digital goods - software, online services, and so on - are explicitly defined as goods that are no different than any other good - like bread, watches, or cars. In other words, you would suddenly own the copies of software you buy, effectively declaring the EULA as a worthless piece of paper. Surprise - the BSA is not happy about this.
Thread beginning with comment 465352
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Um, I disagree
by wannabe geek on Tue 8th Mar 2011 21:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Um, I disagree"
wannabe geek
Member since:
2006-09-27

Competition -- not regulation -- makes software better.


Exactly! I cringe when politicians want to introduce yet more industry regulation. How did that work for the Soviets?

I'm also weary of software being treated just like physical goods. I oppose so-called "intellectual property", especially patents,. The EULAs would be fine by me, if they were just a contract between the user and the vendor, like an NDA, but not affecting third parties who didn't agree to it. It would be much better if "closed source" software companies based their business model on software-as-a-service and secrecy (like Google does). But then reverse engineering would have to be fair game.

All in all, I guess this time I side with (YUCK) the BSA.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Um, I disagree
by WereCatf on Tue 8th Mar 2011 22:02 in reply to "RE[3]: Um, I disagree"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

It would be much better if "closed source" software companies based their business model on software-as-a-service


If they did that they'd be liable under a completely different set of laws and rules, that's the whole point why they sell you a product and then later on tell you that they actually didn't sell you it: it allows them to circumvent the laws. And THAT is the whole point of this whole thing here: only software companies can circumvent the rules whereas no other industry sector can, and they trample on customer rights in the process.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Um, I disagree
by JAlexoid on Wed 9th Mar 2011 03:17 in reply to "RE[3]: Um, I disagree"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

How did that work for the Soviets?

Please. You have no fscking idea what you are trying to imply here.
This is not regulation, for that matter, it's consumer rights protection.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Um, I disagree
by wannabe geek on Wed 9th Mar 2011 12:19 in reply to "RE[4]: Um, I disagree"
wannabe geek Member since:
2006-09-27

"How did that work for the Soviets?

Please. You have no fscking idea what you are trying to imply here.
This is not regulation, for that matter, it's consumer rights protection.
"

Call it what you like. It's bureaucrats deciding on what consumers should or should not agree to. The market already has plenty of mechanisms for consumer protection and vendor liability. For mission-critical software, it's done by contracts. For mass market software, reputation is more than enough. Second-guessing these mechanisms will make software more expensive for consumers.

Reply Parent Score: 1