Post-purchase EULA modification: Difference between revisions

(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)

Line 1:

{{Incomplete|Issue 1=Makes claims without citations or references.|Issue 2=Needs new organization through headers to fit with the quality standards of CRW.|Issue 3=Needs specific incidents to strengthen the arguments.}}

{{Incomplete|Issue 1=Makes claims without citations or references.|Issue 2=Needs new organization through headers to fit with the quality standards of CRW.|Issue 3=Needs specific incidents to strengthen the arguments.}}{{Main|End user license agreement}}

Post-purchase [[end-user license agreement]] (EULA) modification~~, colloquially referred to as the ‘[[EULA roofie]]’~~ is when the terms that govern a customer’s use of a product or service are modified after the initial purchase. Rejecting these contractual changes are often impossible without the consumer either losing access to the product or service they paid for{{Citation needed|reason=give example}} or losing substantial functionality{{Citation needed|reason=give example}}. In some cases, no ‘reject’ option is given, other than to power off the product and never use it again (such as the case of the Roku smart TV,{{Citation needed}}) or the deletion of an account (such as with [[PayPal]]{{Citation needed}} and [[Nintendo's May 2025 Policy Updates|Nintendo]]{{Citation needed}}).

Post-purchase [[end-user license agreement]] (EULA) modification is when the terms that govern a customer’s use of a product or service are modified after the initial purchase. Rejecting these contractual changes are often impossible without the consumer either losing access to the product or service they paid for{{Citation needed|reason=give example}} or losing substantial functionality{{Citation needed|reason=give example}}. In some cases, no ‘reject’ option is given, other than to power off the product and never use it again (such as the case of the Roku smart TV,{{Citation needed}}) or the deletion of an account (such as with [[PayPal]]{{Citation needed}} and [[Nintendo's May 2025 Policy Updates|Nintendo]]{{Citation needed}}).

EULA modifications may sometimes work in the consumer’s favor (such as [[Valve removes arbitration requirement from Steam Subscriber Agreement|Valve removing forced arbitration]] [[Steam]]'s terms of service) or simply serve to clarify or correct terms in a reasonable way and which does not adversely affect the consumer.

Line 27:

Products that require recurring operational costs for their necessary advertised functions (backend service upkeep, staff involvement, etc.) can't function on their own without income. Lifetime license users may be serviced at a loss compared to subscription-based users who meet the recurring revenue operational cost demand. The price difference between a lifetime license and a subscription-based license only offsets the threshold of when a lifetime subscription customer becomes unprofitable to service.

====~~The ‘EULA roofie’~~====

====Hidden EULA language====

The use of the colloquial term ‘EULA roofie’ stems from comparisons between the practice of ~~post-purchase~~ EULA ~~modification~~, and the practice of spiking a drink – where consent is sought and given for the consumption of the drink, but not for the consumption of whatever it has been spiked with. The most common association with this term is when a company retroactively amends their terms to introduce forced arbitration, such as with [[Nintendo]] in [[Nintendo's May 2025 Policy Updates|advance of the release]] of the [[Nintendo Switch|Nintendo Switch 2]]{{Citation needed}}.

The use of the colloquial term ‘EULA roofie’ stems from comparisons between the practice of hiding EULA terms, and the practice of spiking a drink – where consent is sought and given for the consumption of the drink, but not for the consumption of whatever it has been spiked with. The most common association with this term is when a company retroactively amends their terms to introduce forced arbitration, such as with [[Nintendo]] in [[Nintendo's May 2025 Policy Updates|advance of the release]] of the [[Nintendo Switch|Nintendo Switch 2]]{{Citation needed}}.

===Retroactive policy enforcement===

Line 45:

Line 46:

[[Category:Anti-Consumer_Practices]]

[[Category:Common terms]]

[[Category:Common license terms]]

[[Category:Rights Stripping]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{Incomplete|Issue 1=Makes claims without citations or references.|Issue 2=Needs new organization through headers to fit with the quality standards of CRW.|Issue 3=Needs specific incidents to strengthen the arguments.}}
+{{Incomplete|Issue 1=Makes claims without citations or references.|Issue 2=Needs new organization through headers to fit with the quality standards of CRW.|Issue 3=Needs specific incidents to strengthen the arguments.}}{{Main|End user license agreement}}
-Post-purchase [[end-user license agreement]] (EULA) modification, colloquially referred to as the ‘[[EULA roofie]]’ is when the terms that govern a customer’s use of a product or service are modified after the initial purchase. Rejecting these contractual changes are often impossible without the consumer either losing access to the product or service they paid for{{Citation needed|reason=give example}}<!-- Should point to something that covered access to a product being impossible without agreeing to the new terms. Potential for this to be pointed out from Take 2's recent EULA changes for all of its software. --> or losing substantial functionality{{Citation needed|reason=give example}}. In some cases, no ‘reject’ option is given, other than to power off the product and never use it again (such as the case of the Roku smart TV,{{Citation needed}}) or the deletion of an account (such as with [[PayPal]]{{Citation needed}} and [[Nintendo's May 2025 Policy Updates|Nintendo]]{{Citation needed}}).
+Post-purchase [[end-user license agreement]] (EULA) modification is when the terms that govern a customer’s use of a product or service are modified after the initial purchase. Rejecting these contractual changes are often impossible without the consumer either losing access to the product or service they paid for{{Citation needed|reason=give example}}<!-- Should point to something that covered access to a product being impossible without agreeing to the new terms. Potential for this to be pointed out from Take 2's recent EULA changes for all of its software. --> or losing substantial functionality{{Citation needed|reason=give example}}. In some cases, no ‘reject’ option is given, other than to power off the product and never use it again (such as the case of the Roku smart TV,{{Citation needed}}) or the deletion of an account (such as with [[PayPal]]{{Citation needed}} and [[Nintendo's May 2025 Policy Updates|Nintendo]]{{Citation needed}}).
 EULA modifications may sometimes work in the consumer’s favor (such as [[Valve removes arbitration requirement from Steam Subscriber Agreement|Valve removing forced arbitration]] [[Steam]]'s terms of service) or simply serve to clarify or correct terms in a reasonable way and which does not adversely affect the consumer.
@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 Products that require recurring operational costs for their necessary advertised functions (backend service upkeep, staff involvement, etc.) can't function on their own without income. Lifetime license users may be serviced at a loss compared to subscription-based users who meet the recurring revenue operational cost demand. The price difference between a lifetime license and a subscription-based license only offsets the threshold of when a lifetime subscription customer becomes unprofitable to service.
-====The ‘EULA roofie’====
+====Hidden EULA language====
-The use of the colloquial term ‘EULA roofie’ stems from comparisons between the practice of post-purchase EULA modification, and the practice of spiking a drink – where consent is sought and given for the consumption of the drink, but not for the consumption of whatever it has been spiked with. The most common association with this term is when a company retroactively amends their terms to introduce forced arbitration, such as with [[Nintendo]] in [[Nintendo's May 2025 Policy Updates|advance of the release]] of the [[Nintendo Switch|Nintendo Switch 2]]{{Citation needed}}.
+{{Main|Hidden EULA language}}
+The use of the colloquial term ‘EULA roofie’ stems from comparisons between the practice of hiding EULA terms, and the practice of spiking a drink – where consent is sought and given for the consumption of the drink, but not for the consumption of whatever it has been spiked with. The most common association with this term is when a company retroactively amends their terms to introduce forced arbitration, such as with [[Nintendo]] in [[Nintendo's May 2025 Policy Updates|advance of the release]] of the [[Nintendo Switch|Nintendo Switch 2]]{{Citation needed}}.
 ===Retroactive policy enforcement===
@@ Line 45: / Line 46: @@
 [[Category:Anti-Consumer_Practices]]
-[[Category:Common terms]]
+[[Category:Common license terms]]
 [[Category:Rights Stripping]]