Hey folks, I need your help.

I'm developing a questionnaire for my dissertation topic (which I will ask you all to fill in when it's done!) but in the mean time I need some general ideas to draw on to develop the questionnaire, so you lot are now one of my focus groups.

I would like you to think about consumer rights in terms of computer software. Please feel free to make any general comments you like, but also specifically think about:

What IS computer software? Would this include games? Consoles? Just PCs?


What do you think your CURRENT rights are in terms of computer software?

Have you ever tried returning software? If so were you successful and what was your reasoning?

Should consumers have a right to evaluate software and have a statutory return period? E.g. similar to the 7 day period you have with normal goods under the Distance Selling Regulations?

How do you think your rights with regards to software compare with other "tangible" products? More, less, the same? If you think they are different, do you think they should be the same?

Is software a "good" or a "service"?

Do you think companies should be liable if the product fails to work properly? E.g. you should have a right to return it if the software is faulty, buggy or not as described?

Do you think companies should be liable for the quality of subsequent updates? E.g. if a patch breaks the software?

Should you be bound by the EULA if you haven't been able to read it beforehand? Or should all companies supply an address where you can read the EULA beforehand?

If companies do not say where the EULA can be found before purchase, should you be able to return software if you reject the EULA?

Any other comments you would like to make.

Please be as detailed as possible. This is all anonymous submission at this point and it would help me a lot if you could make some comments.

I'll use this data to develop my questionnaire and I'll post that on x404 when it's ready (I need 100 respondents so if I can get some here that would be great!).

Oh one final thought, should any new legislation be brought in at Westminster or at a European level?

Should any new rights cover just boxed software or also downloads? How could you avoid fraud (people installing software and then returning the disc?).

What IS computer software? Would this include games? Consoles? Just PCs?
Anything that runs on Computer hardware

What do you think your CURRENT rights are in terms of computer software?
If you don't agree to the EULA for software you can return it

Have you ever tried returning software? If so were you successful and what was your reasoning?
Yes, direct to company I bought it from as it was advertised for working on all versions of Windows 7 and would not run on 64 bit

Should consumers have a right to evaluate software and have a statutory return period? E.g. similar to the 7 day period you have with normal goods under the Distance Selling Regulations?
No, Demo versions are available for evaluation purposes for this reason already.

How do you think your rights with regards to software compare with other "tangible" products? More, less, the same? If you think they are different, do you think they should be the same?
Arguably you have more rights in that you can try before you buy for a long period of time.

Is software a "good" or a "service"?
Service, you have a licence to use the good, but do not own the good.

Do you think companies should be liable if the product fails to work properly? E.g. you should have a right to return it if the software is faulty, buggy or not as described?
Yes (see link at end)

Do you think companies should be liable for the quality of subsequent updates? E.g. if a patch breaks the software?
Liable for quality of end product similar to the gamers bill of rights

Should you be bound by the EULA if you haven't been able to read it beforehand? Or should all companies supply an address where you can read the EULA beforehand?
You can for things like MS software, however it's 85 pages or something like that but some do make it available.

If companies do not say where the EULA can be found before purchase, should you be able to return software if you reject the EULA?
You legally can.

http://www.edge-online.com/blogs/the-gamers-bill-rights
The 10 rights gamers should have:
1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don't work with their computers for a full refund.
2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.
3. Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game's release.
4. Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game.
5. Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will adequately play on that computer.
6. Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won't install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their express consent.
7. Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time.
8. Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers.
9. Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play.
10. Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play.

1,2,3,5,6,7 should also apply to PC software

Cheers Fin, that's very useful.

Looking forward to seeing some more responses.

What IS computer software? Would this include games? Consoles? Just PCs?
Anything that runs on hardware: firmware, games, operating systems, programs, etc...

What do you think your CURRENT rights are in terms of computer software?
Whatever is laid out in the EULA

Have you ever tried returning software? If so were you successful and what was your reasoning?
Yes, I have tried with mixed responses. I have never been able to return PC software, though I have been told at time of purchase that compatibility problems wouldn't be a valid reason to return. Downloaded and paid for software has been unsuccessful, but then again there was a trial version for me to try.
Games for consoles I have been able to return without problems.

Should consumers have a right to evaluate software and have a statutory return period? E.g. similar to the 7 day period you have with normal goods under the Distance Selling Regulations?
I think trial software should be produced. The problem with allowing returns is that you cannot always guarantee that the user has uninstalled the software, unless there are things such as serial numbers which are checked online, etc which I don't particularly agree with.

How do you think your rights with regards to software compare with other "tangible" products? More, less, the same? If you think they are different, do you think they should be the same?
They compare similarly with those of a book or some music, but nothing like that of a TV or washing machine.

Is software a "good" or a "service"?
A service.

Do you think companies should be liable if the product fails to work properly? E.g. you should have a right to return it if the software is faulty, buggy or not as described?
Fifteen years ago, yes. Today, they should instead provide patches to rectify bugs and faults. If a product is not as describes, a return should be allowed.

Do you think companies should be liable for the quality of subsequent updates? E.g. if a patch breaks the software?
Yes. If a patch breaks an update then the company should fix it.
I think if the patch affect many customers then it should be made a priority to rectify it. If the patch breaks some minor then it should have a low priority unless the customer has a sufficient support plan.

Should you be bound by the EULA if you haven't been able to read it beforehand? Or should all companies supply an address where you can read the EULA beforehand?
No you shouldn't be bound BEFORE you read it (and ignoring it is no excuse). Yes, companies should supply an up-to-date version of the EULA somewhere (be it on a web address or on paper if requested).
Large companies (like MS and Apple) seem to provide a copy of the EULA on the net.

If companies do not say where the EULA can be found before purchase, should you be able to return software if you reject the EULA?
Only if you have had to purchase the software in order to read the EULA.

Any other comments you would like to make.
Interesting topic, I've been learning about open source licences and have found it really interesting. I wish you the best of luck.

Should any new legislation be brought in at Westminster or at a European level?
Not sure.

Should any new rights cover just boxed software or also downloads? How could you avoid fraud (people installing software and then returning the disc?).
Everything, though if a demo has been offered then perhaps not.
Fraud could be avoided by serial numbers being checked over the net, and the software to stop running if the code has been marked as returned. I don't like this method, though am unsure how else to tackle it.

What IS computer software? Would this include games? Consoles? Just PCs?
Anything that runs on Computer hardware

What do you think your CURRENT rights are in terms of computer software?
The software can be returned/refunded if rejected on the grounds of its EULA
I have the right to ask for and examine any data pertaining to me, my actions, history, habits or my computer whether stored locally or remotely. This includes the contents of any encrypted files. A reasonable fee can be charged.

Have you ever tried returning software? If so were you successful and what was your reasoning?
Returned Gran Turismo 4 to the vendors as the disk had been previously played and was scratched. Was successful.

Is software a "good" or a "service"?
It's a service. The good is the medium it is stored on/in. As a service one uses it under the terms of a service agreement i.e. the EULA. If either party breaks that agreement then the licence is void.

Should consumers have a right to evaluate software and have a statutory return period? E.g. similar to the 7 day period you have with normal goods under the Distance Selling Regulations?
Yes. All installable software should be released in downloadable demo version (which may involve crippling of certain features) prior to purchase. Software should be rejectable, rerturnable and/or refundable if not fit for the purpose advertised by the vendor. This should not be interpreted as being rejectable if not fit for the customer's purpose.

How do you think your rights with regards to software compare with other "tangible" products? More, less, the same? If you think they are different, do you think they should be the same? Software is not a "tangible" product - it is a service. Namely that the software shall continue to instruct the hardware to perform the operations as advertised by the vendor and subject to the provisions of the EULA. The rights should be on a par with other service agreements e.g. tenancy agreements.

Do you think companies should be liable if the product fails to work properly? E.g. you should have a right to return it if the software is faulty, buggy or not as described? The vendor should be liable for any fault inherent in the software that renders it not fit for the purpose as advertised by that vendor. The end-user should have immediate statutory recourse (e.g. refund/replacement) to the vendor and the vendor to the publisher. This should cover unintended errors in design, coding, compilation, material production and/or storage e.g. HTTP download server. The vendor/producer/designer should be liable for any damage to hardware and/or relevant customer data (e.g. game save files, drawing files) incurred during the normal advertised use of the software. The vendor/producer/designer should not be liable for any damage incurred to non-relevant customer data (e.g. various system files) incurred during the normal advertised use of the software except where it can be proved that the damage occurred as a result of negligence on the part of the vendor/producer/designer.

Do you think companies should be liable for the quality of subsequent updates? E.g. if a patch breaks the software?
Yes as above. Furthermore all patches and/or updates should be always reversible. Access to the reversal procedure should remain even if the software ceases to function.

Should you be bound by the EULA if you haven't been able to read it beforehand? Or should all companies supply an address where you can read the EULA beforehand?
This information should be freely available either on the company's website or by mail.

If companies do not say where the EULA can be found before purchase, should you be able to return software if you reject the EULA?
You can already

:Edited to add:
Should any new rights cover just boxed software or also downloads? Any rights that can reasonably apply to all software should do so.

How could you avoid fraud (people installing software and then returning the disc?). It should be the duty of the publisher to prove misuse, and/or fraudulent appropriation. Identity, once established, should be assumed to be correct except where it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt that the identity is false. Sanctions should not include the removal of data (e.g. game saves) except where data was supplied as part of the original software.

What IS computer software? Would this include games? Consoles? Just PCs?
Tricky. Software for me as a term also covers games but 'computer' software is more defined and doesnt include consoles

What do you think your CURRENT rights are in terms of computer software?
Not a lot if I think about it. I know it can be tricky returning a game unless faulty (physically, not 'buggy') and I can reject EULA for other software but not sure in the real world what that means. I know I sound thick but its not something i've really done/come across before

Have you ever tried returning software? If so were you successful and what was your reasoning?
Not that I can remember

Should consumers have a right to evaluate software and have a statutory return period? E.g. similar to the 7 day period you have with normal goods under the Distance Selling Regulations?
I understand I can obtain trials and demos for some software and games already. Where this isnt available then I think there should be an opportunity to return it if not 100% happy

How do you think your rights with regards to software compare with other "tangible" products? More, less, the same? If you think they are different, do you think they should be the same?
Less. I know if I purchase what turns out to be a poor product such as a Blu-Ray player that crashes, etc I will demand my money back. If I buy software thats a bit buggy (oh my god Age of Conan!) then I feel I'm supposed to wait for patches, etc when I guess I should be able to return it. I've never thought to do that though so I guess its a mindset I have

Is software a "good" or a "service"?
I guess it can be either

Do you think companies should be liable if the product fails to work properly? E.g. you should have a right to return it if the software is faulty, buggy or not as described?
Yes

Do you think companies should be liable for the quality of subsequent updates? E.g. if a patch breaks the software?
Yes

Should you be bound by the EULA if you haven't been able to read it beforehand? Or should all companies supply an address where you can read the EULA beforehand?
You must be able to read it in full first

If companies do not say where the EULA can be found before purchase, should you be able to return software if you reject the EULA?
If its not in the box, manual or install proces then yes

What IS computer software? Would this include games? Consoles? Just PCs?
Computer software is any code prepared in a usable programming language that may be executed on suitable and sufficient hardware. It does include games, console applications, mobile applications.

What do you think your CURRENT rights are in terms of computer software?
Massively variable. It depends in which country it was written (or so say most EULA's anyway). Unless specifically permitted by the software licence then any software I own is for my own use. Some is limited to non-commercial uses.

Have you ever tried returning software? If so were you successful and what was your reasoning?
Not that I can remember ecept where it went back with the hardware that went with it (i.e returning a defective PC).

Should consumers have a right to evaluate software and have a statutory return period? E.g. similar to the 7 day period you have with normal goods under the Distance Selling Regulations?
I'd certainly be in favour of this for certain types of software. Office and complex creative applications for instance where it's not practical to perform a reasonable evaluation or to determine if it will meet your requirements without using the software. For things like Games this is much more difficult and some sort of feature limitation would appear to be in order. Being able to assess something and finish it then return it wouldn't be fair to the software/game author as they'd never make any money. Disabling advanced features, locking out higher levels or doing something like Ambrosia Software and adding the Cap'n Hector effect are all acceptable ways to allow evaluation.

How do you think your rights with regards to software compare with other "tangible" products? More, less, the same? If you think they are different, do you think they should be the same?
Less, although there isn't really anything else quite like software to compare it with. Other than the media it comes on it's not a physical product. I suspect that having exactly the same rights associated with software could be very difficult to implement, especially things like sufficient quality. Who's definition of sufficient would you use?

Is software a "good" or a "service"?
It depends on exactly what sort of software. I'd generally view most software as Both. The initial purchase or download is a Good however any ongoing support is essentially a Service if it adds new features or provides a helpline or further product support. Fixing critical bugs (ones that stop the product from working or that put the user or their data at significant risk of loss) is akin to repairing or replacing faulty goods however.

Do you think companies should be liable if the product fails to work properly? E.g. you should have a right to return it if the software is faulty, buggy or not as described?
I guess that would come down to the cost of the software to a certain extent. If you didn't pay for it (Freeware) or it's some sort of evaluation version then you haven't lost any money by trying it out.
If the software causes significant damage to your data (e.g. wipes your hard disk) or results in physical loss or damage then I think the users should have a definite right to a refund and possibly compensation. Can anyone think of another good or service that would get away with providing something defective and then saying any damage caused by use within the rules was the consumers own risk for using it?

Do you think companies should be liable for the quality of subsequent updates? E.g. if a patch breaks the software?
Tricky. I don't think that it is acceptable to deliberately release a patch to disable existing features or functions in order to force a paid for upgrade. It depends on what sort of liability we're talking about here. If you mean they should ensure the patch/update works then yes, but that also means they can fix any errors that weren't caught by testing. I'm not sure about imposing fines or whatever if the patch doesn't work. That would undoubtedly stifle creativity.

Should you be bound by the EULA if you haven't been able to read it beforehand? Or should all companies supply an address where you can read the EULA beforehand?
No, you should not be bound by what purports to be a legal document without being able to read it first and deciding if you agree. If a EULA is only viewable as part of the install process then the user should be able to return the software if they don't agree.

If companies do not say where the EULA can be found before purchase, should you be able to return software if you reject the EULA?
Yes, see above answer.

Should any new legislation be brought in at Westminster or at a European level?
A consistent approach by the EU would be my preference here. For one thing it would be harder for software companies in other parts of the world to ignore.

+1 for the gamer rights bit posted by finlay666.

I disagree. If some twunt is too stupid to read the minimum requirements on a box, then wonders why Crysis won't run on their 486 with a Voodoo graphics card then it's their own stupid fault.

That would be fair enough. I suspect though that we'd be looking at a return if it didn't work on a system that met or exceeded the minimum specs.

Indeed.

Thanks all, I should now have enough responses to help develop my questionnaire, I'll try and have it posted up by the end of business on Monday.

I have bought games that have had a minimum spec, and been unusable
Or games that are buggy, like World of Goo on GFWL, it won't work on anything other than XP apparently

If I can't get a game to work... I doubt it's my PC given the spec of it