Enlisted

EULA evaluation of Enlisted
  • Overall Score: 32

  • Readability: 11
  • Data and Privacy: 10
  • Player Rights: 5
  • Changes to EULA: 7
  • Liability and Disputes: 8
  • Criteria Score Detail
    Clarity of Language 2 The EULA contains **a lot of legal terms**, and while some sections are understandable, important details are still hidden behind unclear language, potentially **harming the user**.
    Text Structure and Formatting 3 The EULA is formatted adequately with **some headings and bullet points**, but important information is still buried or not highlighted, making it moderately difficult to follow.
    Length and Conciseness 3 The EULA is **moderately concise**, but there are still some areas where it could be shorter without sacrificing clarity. Users might struggle to stay engaged but can generally follow the document.
    User-Friendly Explanations and Examples 2 The EULA offers **minimal explanations**, with a few difficult terms clarified, but most of the document is left without additional help, leaving users in a potentially harmful position.
    User-Friendly Explanations and Examples 1 There is **no summary version**, and users are forced to read the entire, often complex, EULA to understand any of the terms, creating a highly harmful situation for users who don’t have time or expertise to review it fully.

    Criteria Score Detail
    Scope of Data Collection 2 The company collects excessive data (e.g., biometric data, browsing history) or tracks user activities across platforms without clear consent or the ability to opt out.
    Data Sharing with Third Parties 2 The company shares data with numerous third parties, including those involved in behavioral advertising, with minimal transparency or user control.
    User Control over Data 2 Users have little to no control over their data, with no meaningful options to opt out of tracking, prevent data collection, or request deletion.
    Retention and Security of Data 2 The company retains data indefinitely without offering users control over deletion, and security measures are weak or not fully disclosed.
    Monetization of Data 2 The company heavily monetizes user data, including through third-party advertising, with minimal transparency or user control over the extent of the monetization.

    Criteria Score Detail
    Ownership of Purchased Content 1 The EULA explicitly states that all purchased content is **only licensed** and can be revoked at any time without compensation. Users have no real ownership or control over their purchases, which can be harmful as they may lose access unexpectedly.
    Refunds and Cancellation Rights 1 The EULA offers **no refund policy** or allows extremely restrictive terms (e.g., refunds only in rare circumstances). Users have no recourse if they are unsatisfied, making this highly aggressive.
    Right to Play 1 The EULA states that access to content or services can be **revoked at any time**, often without notice, giving users no guarantee of continued play. This is highly harmful, as users may lose access with no compensation.
    Fair Use and Modding Rights 1 The EULA **prohibits all modding or fair use** of the game content, and any attempts to create user-generated content (UGC) are strictly forbidden. This stifles user creativity and is highly aggressive.
    Intellectual Property and User-Generated Content 1 The company claims **full ownership** of all UGC, even when created by the user. This is highly aggressive, as users lose any rights over their own creations.

    Criteria Score Detail
    Notification of Changes 2 Changes are **posted on the website or app** but without direct communication to users. This means users may still miss important changes unless they frequently monitor the EULA, which is inconvenient and can be harmful.
    Consent to Changes 1 Changes to the EULA are made **unilaterally** by the company, and users are automatically bound by the new terms without any opportunity to consent. This is highly aggressive and harmful to users who may not agree with the changes.
    Impact of Changes 2 Major changes are made, but the company provides **minimal highlights**, leaving users to sift through the EULA to find how their rights or obligations have changed. The impact can still be harmful, as important updates are easily missed.
    Accessibility of Changes 1 Changes to the EULA are made in **complex legal language**, making it difficult for users to understand what has changed. Previous versions of the EULA are not accessible, making it impossible to compare the old and new terms.
    Opt-out Option 1 Users have **no option** to opt out of the changes, and must either accept the new terms or stop using the service entirely, losing access to their account and data without any recourse. This is highly harmful to user rights.

    Criteria Score Detail
    Are liability limitations reasonable or overly restrictive? 2 The company disclaims most responsibility, including for product defects and issues caused by negligence. Users are **left vulnerable**, as there is minimal protection against company actions or failures.
    Is there a cap on the company’s liability, and is it reasonable? 2 The liability cap is **very low**, offering **minimal compensation** for damages or losses, even in significant cases. The user is left with little recourse in the event of serious problems.
    Does the EULA require arbitration or provide court access? 1 **Mandatory arbitration** is required for all disputes, and users have **no option** to take legal action in court. The terms severely limit the user’s ability to resolve disputes fairly.
    Is there a clear process for dispute resolution? 2 The dispute resolution process is **vague**, and users are given minimal information on how to proceed. The lack of clarity makes it challenging for users to understand their rights or how to act.
    Is class-action participation allowed? 1 **Class actions are strictly prohibited**, and users are forced to pursue disputes on an individual basis, severely limiting their ability to take collective legal action. This is **highly restrictive** and harmful to user rights.