The mere fact that so many people have questions about the EULA is a clear indication that it needs to be re-worked and re-worded. This is not the only Poser-related site/forum that is going through the same "discovery process" and trying to figure out the legality and implications of the EULA.

If I understand law correctly, in order for a contract of any type to be legally binding, it has to be read, understood, and agreed upon by both parties. If there are any abiguities in the contract, the chances are that any claims made against that contract will be dismissed. Hence, this is one of the reasons that minors and people with learning disabilities (ie, people who do not have an adequate level of intelligence, grasp, or interpretation of the law) cannot engage in a contractual agreement without the consent of a legal guardian.

I do not think that anyone is stating that CL, DAZ, or any other commercial entity does not have certain rights or obligations to protect their intellectual property, or whatever commodity they offer. However, when a legally binding document is written in such a manner that the interpretation can be misconstrued, it only leads to confusion and possible litigation over misunderstandings that could be avoided by a simple re-issuance of the document.

The concerned parties, in this case mostly the consumers, are trying to rectify the ambiguities by prompting the company(-ies) in question to divulge and explain the interpretation and point-of-view in which the document was written. Relying upon admissions of "faith" and non-binding statements could potentially cause undue hardships for those that rely upon them. Therefore, clarification and discussion is definitely warranted.