EULA roofie

The term "EULA roofie" was coined by consumer rights advocate Louis Rossmann to describe the deliberate practice of burying contentious terms deep within an End User License Agreement (EULA) instead of presenting them upfront at the point of sale. The term applies to situations where such terms, if made clear upfront, might cause a reasonable customer to second-guess their purchase.

This term draws a parallel to the unethical practice of manufacturing consent for something an individual would not agree to if they were of sound mind and body, understood the situation, and had the ability to make an informed choice. It emphasizes the erosion of informed consent by equating it to a shameful action.

The "EULA roofie" particularly applies when terms are so unconscionable that they would likely lead to rejection of the product or service if disclosed prominently. By burying these terms in dense legal documents, manufacturers exploit:

1. Consumers' inability to understand complex legalese. 2. Practical time constraints placed on consumers with obligations such as full-time jobs, school, families, and other responsibilities, making it impractical to read a 30-page EULA before using a washing machine or buying a movie.

The "EULA roofie" applies to individuals and corporations that utilize these practices to secure and manufacture consent under false pretenses.

To illustrate, Rossmann has compared this practice to the moral failing of needing to hide objectionable conditions to gain compliance. Just as drugging someone to secure agreement is indefensible, so too is the act of concealing ethically or morally questionable terms on page 67 of a contract. The term "EULA roofie" attempts to draw a greater degree of societal scorn, scrutiny, and condemnation towards these actions, as they are currently seen as a minor legal nuisance rather than what they truly are: a genuine disregard for human rights and informed consent.

Core Concept

The "EULA roofie" describes three key deceptive practices:

1. Burying unattractive terms deep within an End User License Agreement while avoiding mention of them in marketing materials and customer-facing interfaces.
2. Making the full terms impractical or impossible for the customer to meaningfully review.
3. Pointing to the End User License Agreement as a justification for unpopular practices.

Notable Examples

Sony PlayStation Store

Sony prominently displays "PURCHASE" buttons for digital content but buries a redefinition of the word "purchase" in Section 10.1 of their terms of service:

"Use of the terms 'own,' 'ownership', 'purchase,' 'sale,' 'sold,' 'sell,' 'rent' or 'buy'... does not mean or imply any transfer of ownership..."

This became an issue in 2023 when Sony and Discovery removed previously "purchased" content from users' libraries, citing terms hidden in their service agreement.

It is common sense that placing "We may take away and remove television and movies you bought & paid for at any time, because purchase doesn't mean purchase anymore" next to the "Add to cart" button would negatively affect sales. Therefore, it is buried on page 21.

Reading a 30-page terms of service before buying a movie is not practical.

Smart Appliance Application Data Collection & Sharing with Third Parties

LG ThinQ app terms of service from July 2024, for use of an LG smart washing machine

LG ThinQ app terms of service from July 2024, for use of an LG smart washing machine: part 2 of 3.

LG Electronics and other manufacturers require users to accept extensive terms of service and privacy policies to use basic "smart" features on home appliances. The time required to actually read these documents (often 3+ hours) negates any time-saving benefits of the smart features themselves, making meaningful informed consent impractical.

Consumer Impact

The practice undermines informed consent in digital transactions by:

• Using lengthy documents (often 50+ pages) to hide terms that rob you of your privacy and rights as an American citizen (your day in court).
• Employing complex legal language to obscure the real meaning of agreements.
• Placing important information deep within documents where it is unlikely to be found.
• Presenting one meaning of terms (like "purchase") in the user interface while legally defining them differently in hidden terms.

Legal Context

While EULAs and Terms of Service are legally binding documents, the "EULA roofie" concept challenges their legitimacy by highlighting how they may violate principles of contract law such as:

• Meeting of the minds (mutual understanding between parties).
• Good faith dealing.
• Reasonable notice of terms.
• Unconscionability (terms so unfair they shock the conscience).

Consumer Protection Response

The concept has been used in advocacy for:

• Plain language requirements in consumer agreements.
• Prominent disclosure of significant terms.
• Reform of digital ownership rights.