First, when you file a lawsuit against a corporation, you typically name the defendants as "XYZ Corporation, and Does 1-100"
No you don't. You sue the corporation. Fictitious defendants only have a place where you have reason to believe that there are other parties you can't explicitly identify, as where you might be suing a company and its suppliers, but can't name the suppliers without the defendant's internal documents to identify them. You can't just add extra parties without claims, in case you might need to add parties. There are other mechanisms for adding parties once you discover the need.
companies don't get put in jail for criminal violations, they get fined.
Hogwash. Part of being on the board of a corporation or a partner at a firm is being on the hook for the company's behavior. Plenty of executives have been sent to jail for corporate criminal acts. That's partly why their salaries are so high; the risk is high. Generally, though, it's more effective to punish the corporation's finances.
Lastly, like all software EULAs, there's no way to agree to Apple's EULA before you buy the software
There's no need to agree before you buy it.
Have you ever tried opening software, and then returning it?
One has nothing to do with the other. You are entitled to a refund for unused software, but the more chances you ignore the opportunity to review the terms, the more work it is to get that refund.
As far as I know, this policy has never been tested in court
Wishing and repeating does not make it so. There are literally hundreds of software licensing cases on the books.
No one should be forced to enter into a contract (the purchase of the software) without knowing and agreeing to the terms and conditions BEFORE the purchase is made, not after.
Buying the box doesn't trigger the license agreement, and the contract of purchase is between you and the retailer; the retailer does not have the authority to grant or deny your access to that which they do not own (i.e. the software in the box). Using what's in the box triggers the license agreement, and no one is required to agree blindly. If you
want to know the terms in advance, you have many opportunities to find out easily. It's
your responsibility to know the terms; the offeror need only make them available to you.
You know two things: (1) software comes with specific terms for its use from the owner, whether it's free, open source, or for-purchase proprietary and (2) breaking the closest disc seal makes it difficult to return (by store, not publisher, policy). The obvious solution is to take one of the several opportunities to review the terms in advance to avoid the hassle.
it would invalidate Microsoft's and everyone else's, because they all do it the same way.
It would also invalidate all open source licenses, and everyone doing it the same way for 20 years is a big clue about what's going to happen. SLAs are simply not going to be categorically rejected by any court.
There is plenty of room for streamlining the rejection and return procedures and for additional consumer protections regarding certain suspect license provisions, but the fundamental right of a person to sell and license portions of his property is not going anywhere.
