Software companies crack down on license infringement
Overlooked EULA licenses gain legal ground as companies get serious
Calder Phillips-Graffin
Issue date: 5/28/09 Section: Sci/Tech
The other major type of license scheme is the proprietary license. If you've ever bought software, you've accepted a proprietary license. All the wonders of open source software aside, certain functionality simply has not been written into freely available software. For example, no free, open source equivalent to SolidWorks or AutoCAD yet exists, nor does a free equivalent to professional video-editing software. Certain high-functionality software will only be written by dedicated companies who have no interest in the free usage or distribution of their software. For these software products, a myriad of different licensing schemes have been conceived.
Now, however, I must make note of something: not all proprietary-licensed software costs money. In fact, much of it is free. However, like Internet Explorer (IE7 and up), iTunes, QuickTime, RealPlayer, AIM, or Adobe Flash Player, the software in question is freely available but the source code is not. In addition, the EULA of these software packages is often quite restrictive with regards to what a user can and cannot do with the software. Sure, it may be free to get, but it's not free for you to play with.
Now that you know the two basic types of license schemes, you're probably wondering what they mean for the end user, you. For most users, the license agreement will never be a problem. You'll use your software for years without ever having to worry about whether you can modify the software. However, for a minority of computer users, the license scheme is rather important. Especially in the context of the development of open source software, the limitations of closed source and proprietary-licensed software often define the bounds of what can and cannot be built into free-licensed software.
However, there are a few major legal issues that have come from license agreements. Most of these have come from the special license agreements that accompany operating systems, which is often hardware-dependent. Certain operating systems are only limited by the architecture of the processor, but others are limited by their manufacturer. The sole example of this is Mac OS X. To run OS X, the host computer must be identified as "Mackintosh" during the installation or the software will not install. The user must also confirm the hardware during installation. These terms of license may in fact be illegal, as they create a monopoly for the supply of compatible hardware. This very issue will likely be decided later this year when a lawsuit between Apple and Psystar Computers comes to trial. Psystar has violated the OS X EULA by installing it on their own hardware, and not surprisingly, Apple isn't too happy about people being able to buy "Mac" computers that don't create a profit for them. The outcome of this case won't come for at least 8 or 9 months, but when it comes, there will be a marked effect on the drafting of EULA restrictions.
As I noted earlier, EULA agreements have become so omnipresent in software installation that they have effectively become another "Are you sure you want to install this software?" check. Just remember before you click that you're not just allowing the software to extract and install on your computer, you're also agreeing to a binding legal agreement. Don't become paranoid about installing software just because of this, but do at least glance at the license. The more you know about the software you're running, the better and smarter a computer user you will be.
Now, however, I must make note of something: not all proprietary-licensed software costs money. In fact, much of it is free. However, like Internet Explorer (IE7 and up), iTunes, QuickTime, RealPlayer, AIM, or Adobe Flash Player, the software in question is freely available but the source code is not. In addition, the EULA of these software packages is often quite restrictive with regards to what a user can and cannot do with the software. Sure, it may be free to get, but it's not free for you to play with.
Now that you know the two basic types of license schemes, you're probably wondering what they mean for the end user, you. For most users, the license agreement will never be a problem. You'll use your software for years without ever having to worry about whether you can modify the software. However, for a minority of computer users, the license scheme is rather important. Especially in the context of the development of open source software, the limitations of closed source and proprietary-licensed software often define the bounds of what can and cannot be built into free-licensed software.
However, there are a few major legal issues that have come from license agreements. Most of these have come from the special license agreements that accompany operating systems, which is often hardware-dependent. Certain operating systems are only limited by the architecture of the processor, but others are limited by their manufacturer. The sole example of this is Mac OS X. To run OS X, the host computer must be identified as "Mackintosh" during the installation or the software will not install. The user must also confirm the hardware during installation. These terms of license may in fact be illegal, as they create a monopoly for the supply of compatible hardware. This very issue will likely be decided later this year when a lawsuit between Apple and Psystar Computers comes to trial. Psystar has violated the OS X EULA by installing it on their own hardware, and not surprisingly, Apple isn't too happy about people being able to buy "Mac" computers that don't create a profit for them. The outcome of this case won't come for at least 8 or 9 months, but when it comes, there will be a marked effect on the drafting of EULA restrictions.
As I noted earlier, EULA agreements have become so omnipresent in software installation that they have effectively become another "Are you sure you want to install this software?" check. Just remember before you click that you're not just allowing the software to extract and install on your computer, you're also agreeing to a binding legal agreement. Don't become paranoid about installing software just because of this, but do at least glance at the license. The more you know about the software you're running, the better and smarter a computer user you will be.
Be the first to comment on this story