And use long complicated word. They bill by the hour. So the longer it takes to write something the more money they make.


>I would like clearer EULAs for software. But your analogy falls apart where most software license vs products fall apart. You buy a light bulb, not the rights to use a light bulb. With software, you buy the rights, not the software itself, hence the wording of the licensing. Also, keep in mind that lawyers write the EULA. I've been conviced for sometime that law school takes many years not so that the laws are learned, but so that they can learn to write ambiguous documents.
>
>>Yet they should be expected (if not required by law) to at least provide a reasonably interpretable document on how a product that they SELL (read: license) can or can not be used. I do not see the selling (licensing) of software as any different than the selling of a light fixture. Yet I can reasonably read the docs that come with a light fixture where I can install it without electrocuting myself, falling off the ladder, etc. I should not have to hire a freaking lawyer to figure out what I can and can not do with a software product. A EULA should not be written by the licensor so as to frustrate the licensee.