Eula?????????
DisparateDreamer
Posts: 2,491
*takes a deep breath*
I was shocked.... LIVID.... when I go to my downloads and find that i have to agree to a new EULA to get my content.
To be frank, I agreed to their Eulas when I bought them and installed. Why is that not good enough?
It feels like the things I paid for are being held hostage to make me agree to any new terms.
I know that daz already took the terms out for applying to old content. But it still feels 100% slimy.
I had another site do this to me, and I reported that to the BBB. Guess what? That website ended up clearing that Eula from me and letting me access whatever I had. new content had a EULA but they couldn't block me from things I'd already paid for in the past.
I can't get over this. Slap in the face. Makes me sick.
Yeah yeah yeah, its not the terms that offend me, though I'm bad at legalese and don't understand much of it. it's the backhanded method of "you can't access all that stuff you've bought for years... doesn't matter that you already had to agree to a EULA when you installed it... we make you agree to a new one or KISS YOUR DOWNLOADS GOODBYE" that makes me feel like I've been blackmailed.
I really can't stomach it.
A person's kind letter to me had me feeling a bit more optimistic about things here, but really???
I'd heard people mention about EULA changes and thought it was just something on new downloads, but this is just over the top for me.
These days, I can barely visit the Daz site- store or forums or even my FREAKING ACCOUNT without feeling absolutely angry. Goes without saying that my money is being spent elsewhere lately!
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
I agree that the new EULA probably shouldn't apply to older content (unless there was a clause in the old EULA that said this might happen, I don't know [I also don't know how legally enforceable such a clause would be]), but unless the new terms are actually objectionable to you, you might as well just accept it and keep moving forward.
If the new terms are objectionable to you, I recommend filing a support ticket with DAZ.
All the best!
That's debatable; one or two parts of the current EULA could be interpreted to mean that it is intended to supersede previous agreements.
But apparently DAZ doesn't want us to discuss this here.
Time change and the TOS and EULA have to change with it. There is nothing wrong with a company updating its TOS and EULA and asking its customer base to agree with it.
By placing the EULA page before you download we cannot claim to have been unaware or non agreeable with it. It may seem shady but understand it is there to protect DAZ3D from those who would try to take advantage and/or undermine the company. And ultimately protect DAZ's honest and loyal custome base.
For example, if someone were to take DAZ products and attempt to resell them online and were caught, they would not be able to claim that they were unaware of the EULA prior to downloading since ignorance of the law is not a valid excuse. There is nothing restrictive in the new EULA that limits or takes away your right to sell your still images and animations.
At least DAZ3D lets you read the whole EULA before your accept it. That is a lot better then software companies that seal their CD envolopes with these little stickers that state "you accept our TOS and EULA by breaking this seal and opening this envolope" or however they word it.
It is important for the protection of not just DAZ but over 300 pa's that people accept the Eula. Since many of those people are swapping to the DIM which does not require a check on EULA then it is essential that they have a copy that covers everything that people may download via it. I don't know about anyone else but I have quite a bit of stuff that I got "just in case". Maybe it was free or cheep or I thought someday I really would do "X" type render and it never has happened.. Yet. I have also in the past realized I did need to use one of those "just in case" products and installed it. If I don't signify that I accept the EULA on the website I never would have to. And yes there are people out there who would be perfectly happy do naughty things and then cheerfully say that they never had to sign a EULA so what ever they are doing is perfectly fine. And before anyone says that they will never ever use the DIM so they shouldn't have to follow the rules set for everyone and that you should be able just accept the EULA with each download.. Can you positively guarantee that no one with poor intent would ever use that loophole to get around the EULA and take advantage what they see as an opportunity to do bad things? Because if you can't then it isn't an option to let some people sign it and some people not. If everyone had the best intent and never considered bad things then we wouldn't have to sign things like this to begin with. But not everyone is going to behave that way so we do.
My bank made me sign an updated agreement to continue managing my account online not too long ago. Paypal's done the same thing numerous times on my phone. Also had to agree to EULAs every time a new patch was released on World of Warcraft.
Far as I can tell it's a "read and agree once" stance on all items because of the Install Manager. They're trying to make it so you don't have to agree to an EULA every time you install an item. You do it once and you're done.
Maybe some bad people are about to have some court action against them ???
We are sorry that you feel that way. It is the belief of DAZ that the new license is much less restrictive than the old license, and once the content is fully converted to the new zip format you will only need to agree with it once, instead of agreeing to it every time you use an exe installer, as is done currently.
The forums are not the place to address this issue. Please contact DAZ sales support by filing a ZENDesk ticket via the links in the Contact Us section at the top of this page. As this issue has already been thoroughly explored in other threads we are closing this thread.