David,
I don't think the problem is with the warranty limitations so much as other additional terms that would be considered "material." For example, I doubt that the warranty card's terms would be enforceable if they indicated that you had not really purchased the toaster, just licensed it, and that you couldn't transfer it to anyone else, and that if you used the toaster in violation of the additional terms they had the right to come into your home and disable the toaster.
Warranties are limited all the time: they generally do not limit the functionality of the product, or change a sale of a good into a license, but that is what many of the shrinkwrap and clickwrap agreements purport to do. And although I think it would be impractical to return a toaster because you don't agree with the warranty limitations contained inside the box, as a legal matter I think you win if you try to return the item to the manufacturer and it refused to accept the return.
Kevin Grierson
>>> DHale[_at_]aggt.com 10/24/00 10:21AM >>>
Much of the controversy surrounding UCITA is that it allows shrinkwrap
licenses, which many characterize as unprecedented and unfair. I am
wondering, however, if any of the anti-shrinkwrap people here would mind
taking a shot at distinguishing the shrinkwrap license from what seems to be
an identical concept (and one with a much longer history): the warranty
card.
Let's say I buy a toaster. I look at the picture on the box at the store. I look at the price. I look at the features listed on the side. I look at the price. I look at the picture again. I decide it looks nice. I pay for it. I take it home and unpack it where I discover a warranty card which modifies the terms of the sale. It disclaims all warranties except for its express warranty against defects good for 90 days only. I don't like the warranty. What can I do? I can take it back, and probably be hassled for returning it after openning the box, especially when I admit that it does function properly. Or I can accept the terms, even though I'm not happy with them. How does a shrinkwrap license differ? (Except in the obvious way that for software the inner package is not openned until after I have been given the chance to review terms -- a chance I didn't have with the toaster.)
Let's set aside for the moment the problem that Best Buy will not accept a box of software that has been openned, even if the inner seal is still fine. I recognize this is a problem, but it can be solved in different ways, like a simple piece of legisislation that requires that returns with inner seals still intact must be accepted.
I am genuinely interested in hearing other views on this. I am open to being convinced as to the evils of UCITA.
-David Hale Received on Wed Oct 25 2000 - 12:54:02 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:41 GMT