Does the EULA prohibit multiple installs on the same computer now?

[Whovian]

You can't pick out one line on a EULA and consider it the whole of the document.

Think of it this way.

EULA's first lines always deny everything (call it a catch all), then later on in the document they selectively authorize.

For computer geeks think firewall rules and/or router ACL's.

The INTENT of the complete document is what counts, NOT selective lines.

You seem to be underestimating how bureaucratic legal systems tend to be.

Regarding the Linux, I think the usage of the term i.e. suggests that may not be a complete list.

[J.Random]

This is considered an attempt at changing the terms of the implicit sales contract after a sale and in some countries, such as Germany, the legal framework says that any such things are null and void.

In other words, in most jurisdictions, either explicitly or expected (but never tested in court) if you didn't agree to something BEFORE you paid, then any agreement which is forced on you AFTER payment in order to be able to use a product or service which you bought is not valid in the eyes of the law.

In those places, for EULAs to be valid you would have to be provided with the full text of the EULA and agreed to it BEFORE you bought a product or service.

However, in some US states EULAs have been considered valid.

Initial EULA may just contain a paragraph allowing seller to change EULA whenever he wants.

[klesh]

Wow that EULA is as messed up as their rushed 1.0 release!

[asmi]

Initial EULA may just contain a paragraph allowing seller to change EULA whenever he wants.

And they can, but the user will still need to confirm that he actually read updated EULA and agreed with it - otherwise the user will still be bound only by old EULA. This is a reason online games always display EULA to players after they have been updated. But this obviously won't work for offline games.

[Korizan]

You seem to be underestimating how bureaucratic legal systems tend to be.

Sadly laws have zero requirements to explain why they are written (my biggest problems with "bureaucratic legal systems")

Been awhile but in England there was a law that states all taxi's will have a bail of hay on them (for the horses we have to presume) but it was still on the books.

A prime example of you can get a ticket for not having a bail of hay by the letter of the law but anyone with even a tiny bit of common sense ... well you get the idea.

And probably the best bit of the entire system is you are required to follow the law and (IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE) but show me just one person that knows every last law.

So yes you could get bitten with an EULA if someone wants to prosecute by the letter (and you find a closed minded judge), but at the same time I do have to ask what the person was doing to get that kind of attention to begin with.

[soulsource]

There's one thing that bothers me slightly. Not that I'm afraid police will show up and arrest all Linux 64bit users, but in order to make KSP capable of addressing textures in memory above 4GB (think: modded installs), Linux 64bit users need to manually edit the Unity Player executable (see the Linux Thread) using a hex-editor... As far as I understand the EULA (which luckily is null and void where I live), this is actually forbidden, right?

[Temeter]

There's one thing that bothers me slightly. Not that I'm afraid police will show up and arrest all Linux 64bit users, but in order to make KSP capable of addressing textures in memory above 4GB (think: modded installs), Linux 64bit users need to manually edit the Unity Player executable (see the Linux Thread) using a hex-editor... As far as I understand the EULA (which luckily is null and void where I live), this is actually forbidden, right?

Look at it this way: Nothing is legally forbidden until a court says so, law is a fluid thing. So don't worry, otherwise all our multiple installs would be illegal too.

Initial EULA may just contain a paragraph allowing seller to change EULA whenever he wants.

Making a contract and actually trying to use a power of 'i'm eligible to indiscriminately alter the conditions at any given time' won't work in most countries. Not sure about the american system, which seems to be a bit borked at times, but you'd have a hard time getting any change of note under european law. Which shouldn't come as a surprise, since that kind of paragraph completely contradicts the essence of what a contract is. Most companies just aren't stupid enough to ever actually try their luck.

And they can, but the user will still need to confirm that he actually read updated EULA and agreed with it - otherwise the user will still be bound only by old EULA. This is a reason online games always display EULA to players after they have been updated. But this obviously won't work for offline games.

That, for example, is actually gonna backfire hard as soon as this will ever cause enough damage to get to court. Most updated eulas are basically just nill real change for costumers so it never becomes an issue.

Edited June 11, 2015 by Temeter

[Wolf Baginski]

The VAT change was at the start of 2015.

I'm not going to try to explain it, but it hardly matters now whether KSP is being bought from Mexico or the Netherlands The change closed a huge tax avoidance loophole.

As I said, the EU Data Protection system is a good thing for the customers.

[luizopiloto]

They'll be fixing the EULA.

The issue with the mods is pretty bad. They ASK us to write and distribute mods, and the EULA specifically forbids it.

So... this is how squad incorporates mods w/o having the obligation to pay the modders... Just kidding

[juanml82]

And they can, but the user will still need to confirm that he actually read updated EULA and agreed with it - otherwise the user will still be bound only by old EULA. This is a reason online games always display EULA to players after they have been updated. But this obviously won't work for offline games.

That depends on local laws. I've read the Argentine law regarding digital contracts a while ago and it states both parties must use a digital signature - the law then defines it, and it's basically a cryptographic digital id for the specific physical person - which means, in my layman understanding of the law, that no EULA can be considered valid under Argentine law because clicking a digital button doesn't equal to signing a contract.

And even more, I don't think there is any country in the world where every single person is allowed to sign contracts. If a minor purchases a game, clicks to agree with the EULA and then breaks it, how many countries would allow the software company to sue a minor for breaking a contract he isn't legally allowed to agree to in the first place?

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

As others have said, the Netherlands thing is because of taxes, and it's a pretty common practice and a very legal one. Most companies big enough to conduct international business have a home base in the Netherlands, and subsidiaries in other countries.

[RobotsAndSpaceships]

Yeah, I noticed this too, all of the games legal/technical stuff seems kinda outdated, if you look at the readme, you'll notice it still has the names of employees who no longer work for Squad on it.

[RobotsAndSpaceships]

I can't seem to find anything on Parallel Dynamics based in Mexico online. However, Deported BV was setup the 22nd of Jan 2015, +/- 1 day before the announcement of KSP going gold.

The Netherlands has been reported as the largest tax haven for US companies, most likely SQUAD is looking to get the most out of their kredits. Also, since tax havens provide little or no financial information to foreign tax authorities this may circumvent any potential affluence related problems in Mexico as Maxmaps pointed out in the past.

That explains 1.0

[sal_vager]

That explains 1.0

Heh, more like 1.0 explains Deported BV, if they are indeed linked, there's a saying about correlation and causation that fits this pretty well.

Also R&S, can't you guys think of any new material? This "speculation" is nearly as cringeworthy as the "Valve forced Squad out of early access" stuff.

Rosco already said it better.

As others have said, the Netherlands thing is because of taxes, and it's a pretty common practice and a very legal one. Most companies big enough to conduct international business have a home base in the Netherlands, and subsidiaries in other countries.

Edited June 12, 2015 by sal_vager

[GusTurbo]

I'm not worried about being sued by Squad. Also I am an evil lawyer.

[Guest]

I'm not worried about being sued by Squad. Also I am an evil lawyer.

Mostly the question pertains to what we can and cannot tell newbies and potential modders here on the forums. Unspoken rules are the bane of productive conversation.

[Robotengineer]

Heh, more like 1.0 explains Deported BV, if they are indeed linked, there's a saying about correlation and causation that fits this pretty well.

Also R&S, can't you guys think of any new material? This "speculation" is nearly as cringeworthy as the "Valve forced Squad out of early access" stuff.

Rosco already said it better.

What, the offshore drilling supply company theory wasn't entertaining enough?

[pslytely psycho]

Well, at least they didn't require us to give them our immortal soul.....

http://www.geek.com/games/gamestation-eula-collects-7500-souls-from-unsuspecting-customers-1194091/

The pertinent part...

" By placing an order via this Web site on the first day of the fourth month of the year 2010 Anno Domini, you agree to grant Us a non transferable option to claim, for now and for ever more, your immortal soul. Should We wish to exercise this option, you agree to surrender your immortal soul, and any claim you may have on it, within 5 (five) working days of receiving written notification from gamesation.co.uk or one of its duly authorised minions. We reserve the right to serve such notice in 6 (six) foot high letters of fire, however we can accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by such an act.

If you a) do not believe you have an immortal soul, have already given it to another party, or c) do not wish to grant Us such a license, please click the link below to nullify this sub-clause and proceed with your transaction."

It was purportedly an April Fools joke, but, you know, maybe lawyers testing the waters?

**you may now return to non-snarky commentary**

***If you take me seriously, please check your meds and be sure you took todays dose....***

[AbacusWizard]

What, the offshore drilling supply company theory wasn't entertaining enough?

Actually, secret deals with an offshore drilling supply company would make sense in light of the ISRU introduced in 1.0. We're drilling for fuel IN SPAAAAACE; how much more offshore can you get?

[jwenting]

A side-note here: most EU countries don't work on Common Law principles such as found in the USA and UK. The Netherlands (and possibly Mexico) uses "Roman Law". Is that significant here? I have no idea.

No juries for one thing. Cases are decided solely by a panel of judges. Also greatly limits liability (no filing suit for a billion dollars in damages if your CPU melts playing KSP for example, the law would have listed the maximum amount which would likely be the cost of replacement of the computer plus court fees). Also, no (at least in the Netherlands) lawyers working on commission, taking a percentage of your settlement. Lawyers are by law required to work on an hourly fee and nothing else (so if the court decides you get 5000 Euro in compensation, YOU get 5000 Euro, not your lawyer 4800 and you 200 like is the norm in the US).

And of course no silly cases where companies are found liable for massive damages on very shaky grounds just because the jury members didn't want to reduce their own chances of getting similar payouts when it's their term to sue someone.

[Caelib]

To be fair, it could just be standard boilerplate EULA print, but it does kind of run against the grain of current KSP SOP.

That's my opinion.