Blizzard goes lawsuit happy

[tkinnun0]

And you have to agree to the EULA multiple times if the patch comes in multiple pieces. To this layman that says that the EULA lasts at most 10 minutes. Blizzard obviously wanted the EULA to cover only the patching process.

[MournelitheCalix]

I would think that this would be more of a EULA issue than a copyright issue.  I'm perfectly fine with companies putting whatever the hell they want in their EULA.  If it's unreasonable, people won't buy their software.  It works out nicely.

(edit) Of course, sinij conveniently failed to link to the original article, so I can't tell if this is actually what it sounds like from that little snippet, or if that's just some Slashdotter using words wrong.

This is not an EULA issue, although if it does weaken EULA's then I will be one very happy camper.  I am sick of reading 10 pages of legalese just to play a game I pay for access to.  

That being said this is not an EULA issue in my opinion because EULA's are between players and the company they are contracting a service with.  In the case of MDY industries you have a corporation who liscences their software to the player who in turn uses it and then violates the EULA they have agreed to follow with Blizzard.  At no time here has MDY industries as a corporate entity actually entered into an agreement with Blizzard.  As a result in my opinion the EULA is not applicable.  

Logically, it seems like the arguement that Blizzard wants the court to accept is that a company can be legally bound to agreements other companies have with their customers without the original companies consent.  If that goes through then there is indeed a very slippery slope because this would mean that personal consent is no longer needed in order to enter into a legally binding agreement.

Edited: some spelling errors

[CmdrSlack]

I would think that this would be more of a EULA issue than a copyright issue.  I'm perfectly fine with companies putting whatever the hell they want in their EULA.  If it's unreasonable, people won't buy their software.  It works out nicely.

(edit) Of course, sinij conveniently failed to link to the original article, so I can't tell if this is actually what it sounds like from that little snippet, or if that's just some Slashdotter using words wrong.

This is not an EULA issue, although if it does weaken EULA's then I will be one very happy camper.  I am sick of reading 10 pages of legalese just to play a game I pay for access to. 

That being said this is not an EULA issue in my opinion because EULA's are between players and the company they are contracting a service with.  In the case of MDY industries you have a corporation who liscences their software to the player who in turn uses it and then violates the EULA they have agreed to follow with Blizzard.  At no time here has MDY industries as a corporate entity actually entered into an agreement with Blizzard.  As a result in my opinion the EULA is not applicable.   

Logically, it seems like the arguement that Blizzard wants the court to accept is that a company can be legally bound to agreements other companies have with their customers without the original companies consent.  If that goes through then there is indeed a very slippery slope because this would mean that personal consent is no longer needed in order to enter into a legally binding agreement.

Edited: some spelling errors

Yes, but buying a copy of WoW to use in order to make the addon would arguably have bound MDY or one of its agents.