A reader writes:
Here’s my explanation based on some of my own experience: At some point in the distant past, a group of lawyers decided on the particular language of a license agreement — probably even arguing for days over the placement of commas (pure speculation on my part). Right or wrong, this is what was agreed to some number of years ago, and everybody is loath to change it now. The existing license agreement as-is has perhaps survived court challenges, or has been otherwise used in various ways throughout the legal system. Any changes to it risk invalidating some of that “currency” in the license agreement.
It takes an incredible amount of time/effort to change the license agreement as lawyers (probably a different group) must again argue over every comma. From a company’s point-of-view, it seems that it is far easier (and hence cheaper) just not to enforce (or “selectively enforce” if you prefer) the various poorer terms of the license agreement.
Clearly, this isn’t much comfort, and it’s far from ideal. But that’s seems to be life in the real world.
3.2.4 Hosting or Third Party Use. You may not Install or Access, or allow the Installation or Access of, the Software over the Internet, including, without limitation, use in connection with a Web hosting or similar service, or make the Software available to third parties via the Internet on Your computer system or otherwise.
Let’s consider this setup: you install AutoCAD on your desktop computer at the office. At home, you’ve got a broadband Internet connection, and your company has a high-speed Internet connection. So you leave work, go home, and VPN into your office computer and start to use AutoCAD; the UI is displayed on your computer at home, acad.exe is running on your computer at work.
According to 3.2.4, this is not allowed because you are “access[ing] … the software over the Internet …”. Even though this is a secure Internet connection (because of VPN), the only connection your computer at home has to the outside would is through your broadband ISP -- the Internet.
Technically, you could setup an environment to get around this restriction. For example, a dialup modem connection from your home to the office; pumping UI over a 56K phone line probably won’t be very satisfactory though. Or a leased-line running from the office to your house. In this case, the bits may actually travel over some of the same copper wire as above, but the IP packets never make it onto the Internet.
Here's why I find frustrating: with little effort the terms could be written to be less ambiguous; then I wouldn’t be subject to the “good faith” of the sofware company. For example, saying something like “the public Internet” in the above would help a lot (although that still isn’t perfect).
Update
Tony Zilles writes about Autodesk licensing in Caveat Emptor:
Are you fully aware of conditions imposed by the end user license agreement (EULA) for the software you use? CADinfo.net has published articles in the past lamenting changes to the AutoCAD license transfer policy and sunset dates for AutoCAD software upgrades. I have yet to be persuaded that these measures are any more than than revenue-boosting ploys of no benefit to customers in any way.
I don't know that the article's title is correct: if you have no choice but to buy AutoCAD, then there is no place for "buyer beware."
Comments