EULAs are Broken

We need better end user license agreements.

We, the users of software, understand the consequences of not reading EULAs. We all know we could be agreeing to some damn thing we find unpalatable, at best. Yet, who has budgeted time in her busy day to read 2953 words of dense legalese? (That's not even an exaggeration. That's the actual word count on the last EULA I saw.)

This is legalese! Even when it is trying to convey a relatively simple idea, it's obnoxiously palaverous. Consider:

"If you do any of the foregoing on behalf of a company or organization, you represent and warrant that you have the requisite authority to bind such company or organization to the terms and conditions of this Agreement."

That sounds pretty scary, but it's just another way of saying, "If you accept this EULA, you are claiming to have the authority to accept EULAs on behalf of your company." By the time you're done reading it, though, you're feeling like you need to call the company lawyer. Lawyers are good at keeping each other employed.

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say: I think the average English speaker lacks the literacy level to slog through one of these things and understand every minute bit of it. How can we reasonably expect her to legally consent to it? Moreover, what is the responsible thing for her to do, under these circumstances? Realistically speaking, she can't call a lawyer up to come over to her desk every time she's installing a piece of software.

Worse, if we somehow miraculously manage to wade through and fully absorb a EULA once, for a given piece of software, some software forces us to agree to the EULA again, with every patch. We are neither told whether the EULA has changed since the last time we read it, nor given any way to do a diff, and see exactly what changes were made. Does Blizzard, for example, actually expect anyone to read the entire EULA from top to bottom (not to mention the Terms of Service), every single time we install a patch? I'd bet that not a single one of their 8 million subscribers has read the entirety of the EULA every time she agreed to it. This is not because the entire human race is irresponsible. It's because we have unreasonable expectations of them.

I understand the value of legalese. That which is vague is open to interpretation. So, it is best to spell everything out in excruciating detail, so there is no room for doubt. Legalese is, in this way, like a programming language that just happens to use a vocabulary and grammar similar to natural language. Lawyers even reuse sections of legalese, like programmers reuse code, just passing in different values to the variables -- company name, date, etc. Over time, they tune, and tweak, and make contracts increasingly difficult to challenge. However, as this boilerplate text becomes more impervious to challenges, it also becomes increasingly impenetrable to the average reader. Honestly, I don't expect the general public to be able to wade through legalese any more than I expect them to be able to wade through my source code.

We need to be more reasonable about what users can realistically consent to, while they are installing software. At the bare minimum, I think software publishers should provide a clear, concise "translation" of the EULA into plain language, for the convenience of those of us without law degrees.

Some companies are starting to see the light. Microsoft has recently started adopting plain English EULAs. They're still too damn long, but it's better than legalese, at least. Have a gander at the new Vista license, for an example. (I hate PDFs, incidentally.)

Here's a passage from the Windows 98 EULA:

"NO OTHER WARRANTIES. To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, Manufacturer and its suppliers disclaim all other representations, warranties, conditions or other terms, either express or implied, including, but not limited to implied warranties amd/or conditions of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, with regard to the SOFTWARE, the accompanying written materials, and any accompanying hardware. This limited warranty gives you specific legal rights. You may have others which vary from state/jurisdiction to state/jurisdiction."

Woah nelly. Check out that run-on sentence near the top (and middle, and halfway through the bottom). I'd hate to have to diagram it. It's the kind of sentence that just makes you want to put hot sauce in the underwear of the guy who wrote it.

Compare that to the equivalent passage from the Vista EULA:

"NO OTHER WARRANTIES. The limited warranty is the only direct warranty from Microsoft. Microsoft gives no other express warranties, guarantees or conditions. Where allowed by your local laws, Microsoft excludes implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement. If your local laws give you any implied warranties, guarantees or conditions, despite this exclusion, your remedies are described in the Remedy for Breach of Warranty clause above, to the extent permitted by your local laws."

Well, it's not great, but it's a breath of fresh air, compared to the other one.

Old Comments

Signal to Noise

It would be fair to say that I've been to a lot of conferences. My first game industry related conference was CGDC 1998 (back before GDC took the "Computer" off the front of their name). So, I guess that makes it 9 years now I've been attending (and sometimes even speaking at) industry conferences, on two continents. I reckon I'm entitled to an opinion or three.

I have a big beef, but it is, in most cases, not with the conferences, themselves. No, my beef is with the myriad parties that inevitably pop up at these events. Don't get me wrong -- I'm grateful for the parties. I'm an extrovert, and I love a good party, honestly. I've had some fun times.

Now, I'm going to make a radical statement, which would seem to defy the expectations of every party organizer who has ever organized a single party attached to any of these conferences: Most people come to these parties to talk. Yeah, I know, geeks aren't supposed to be social, but it's true. You look around at any of these parties, and people are talking. Or, at least, they're trying to.

You see, the trouble is that it feels like most of these parties have been organized for 21-year-old club kids from Amsterdam, only with less drugs.

Now, dear party organizers, you should understand: I love dancing. I was dancing at industrial clubs when DJ WhoeverTheHellYouHired was learning his ABCs. I was at illegal raves under bridges, back before the US club scene discovered techno. I have even been known to dance at some of these conference parties -- but I must tell you, it's because it was too goddamn loud to talk to anyone, and I was honestly getting rather bored.

I have seen parties where every single person at the party was trying to shout over the music, and inexplicably, someone turned up the volume. Why? This makes no sense! I have seen friends and colleagues lose their voices from these events. I have heard people complain of their ears ringing after leaving a conference party. Ears ringing! That's hearing damage, people. I'm sorry, but your party is not worth anyone permanently damaging their hearing.

So, I'm making a plea: Turn the music the hell down. Stop making us miserable. Pay attention to your party-goers, and what their needs are. If we want to talk, then by all means, let us talk.

Geek Love

For those of you who still use vi/vim on the Windows platform, hang on to your hats. I know you're used to nothing ever changing, but there is, in fact, news. There's a new, less ugly user interface available for your old favorite text editor.

Yes, I know, user interfaces are superfluous. Yes, I know, you don't even know what those silly icons at the top of your vim window are for, and you can't even remember the last time you actually used one of the menus. Yet, I do have to recommend the upgrade. Check out the feature list. Macro recording! My God, we are marching boldly into the 1980s here, my friends. If you love vim, you should have a looksee. I'm taking it for a spin, myself.

Old Comments

Screenplay Workshop

This may be of interest to designers and other writers in the Austin area:

An film-maker acquaintance of mine runs a free screenplay workshop. Game developers are welcome. I'll be at the one on January 13th.

I Hate Memes

Sara at We Can Fix That with Data has tagged me for the ubiquitous 5-things-you-don't-know-about-me meme, probably as some sort of sinister plot to try to get me to stop ignoring this blog. (As some of you have noticed, I keep another one elsewhere, which is updated more frequently, but it's more personal, lifey stuff.)

I admit, it's hard to think of things that people don't know about me. I tend to talk about bloody everything, if you get me started. But I'll try my best:

1.) I find it almost impossible to listen to lectures -- I zone out after about five minutes, tops. I once took an astronomy course with no textbook. Instead of going to class, I went to the library, and studied every book I could find related to the items on the syllabus. It was honestly easier for me to absorb the information that way than it would have been for me to sit through the lectures.

2.) I hate learning new games -- This is one of those things that becomes gradually apparent to anyone who hangs out with me long enough. This holds true of board games, card games, and video games. No matter how fun something looks, I find it frustrating learning the new button combos, or the obscure rules, or the meanings of all the various pieces and symbols. My well-meaning friends will try to explain everything, but #1 comes into play, and I miss half of what they're saying.

3.) I once won a talent contest -- When I was 10, I won a talent contest at my elementary school. I sang the theme song to "Flashdance." Is that embarrassing enough for you?

4.) I was originally an Electrical Engineering major -- I thought they'd let me tinker. Instead, I spent two years solving circuit equations, and doing dull math. Boring!

5.) I've helped out with the Special Olympics before -- Pin the Tail on the Donkey has never been this riveting.

I don't tag anyone. I hate memes.

Old Comments

No Rest for the Wicked

I don't post anywhere NEAR often enough to be putting plugs for anything in, but I have some good friends who have started up a small pen-and-paper game biz, and I couldn't resist putting in a word or two. I'm really looking forward to their Dresden Files RPG (based on Jim Butcher's Dresden Files novels), but in the meantime, they have just released a new product, and have yet another one on the way.

Their new offering, Dont Rest Your Head is a game for those of you who complain that generic systems are what killed pen-and-paper gaming. This is an all-custom system, heavily integrated into the game's theme. The concept behind the game is that the player characters are all insomniacs, and that their sleep deprivation has allowed them to see things that other people can't -- while also making them vulnerable to sinister elements that couldn't reach them before. This is a good game for folks who appreciate Grant Morrison, or Neil Gaiman's Neverwhere, or heck -- anyone who just likes unusual original game systems.

Old Comments

Are Electronic Games Art?

I was once disconcerted to hear John Carmack state to an entire auditorium full of game developers that electronic games are not art. Film critic Roger Ebert famously chimed in on the same topic at the 58th Annual Conference on World Affairs, resulting in an ongoing debate on his own website, and elsewhere. The debate has spilled over in many places in recent months, sparking all the usual arguments over whether one can even define art, and what the hell "art" means, anyway.

Yes, you can define art.

This is not to say that everyone (even informed academics) will agree on what it means, or that even after establishing a definition, you will be able to abolish all grey areas. Whatever definition you finally settle on, there will always be some Marcel Duchamp ready to gleefully come along and piss on your party.

Because it is the very best fabric I have to work with, I choose to use the classical definition which was taught in my Art Theory course, years ago: Art is recta ratio factibilium. What the hell does that mean? Well, at the very core, art is about making. But moreover, it is the recta, or right making of a work. Making without art is merely brutish labor. "Time to make the doughnuts." When you hear a critic complain that an actor was "phoning in" his performance, that is a perfect example of artlessness.

So, what about games?

The question is somewhat complicated by the fact that games are a compound work. Games are comprised of numerous sub-works, many of which are easily classified as being art, or potentially art. Music, visual assets, writing, voice performances, and many other sub-products within a given game are obviously art. In fact, we call our visual assets "art," and the people who make them "artists." However, I think that this is a red herring. Film is also a compound work, comprised of many sub-products (costumes, sets, writing, music, etc.) which are classified independently as art. However, the completed compound work, film itself, is also a recognized art form. So, we should not let the compound nature of games distract us from the real question -- whether the completed work is art.

Given my working definition, the only clear answer, for me, is that games absolutely have the potential to be art -- every bit as much as movies do. The question is not whether games are art, but rather whether we developers are being true to our work. Are we just churning out fast food? Or do we have the courage to make things right?

For better or for worse, the answer to the infernal question lies in our own hands.

Old Comments