Re: Beyond Shrinkwrap

On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Todd J. Paglia <tpaglia[_at_]essential.org> wrote:
>
> While the UCC is not as extreme as Microsoft's attempted license,
> it's not that far off. You don't have access to the license terms under
> the UCC 2B until after you have paid for the product. In a sale involving
> physical medium (Egghead Software), this means that you go to the store,
> pay for it, go home, begin installation, then get access to the terms when
> an icon pops up on the screen asking that you consent to the license. If
> you actually read the license, become offended by the onerous terms, and
> take it back for a refund, you have to deal with the sales person who will
> likely have never dealt with this istuation, and then you must start the
> process all over with some alternative product. Because the terms are
> hidden until after the sale is made, the burden of dealing with this
> post-sale issue is placed on the consumer.
>
> As for the reasonableness of the terms, after working on UCC 2B
> for the last 6 months I have found that many of the permissible terms are
> unreasonable and overly protective of the software industry. In addition,
> software vendors can include unreasonable terms and they become binding as
> long as an "I Agree" icon is clicked for those terms. It is quite easy for
> a software company to write a license under UCC 2B that will eliminate all
> liability other than a refund--thus tech support calls, damaged hardware,
> lost data, etc. are all expenses absorbed by the consumer. For more info
> see our page at http://www.cptech.org/ucc/ucc.html

I've objected to the draft UCC position on licenses from the beginning. I don't think I've every read a clearer more succinct description of my reasons than Todd's. I agree wholeheartedly.

Mary Brandt Jensen		University of Mississippi
Director of the Law Library	University, MS 38677
Assistant Professor of Law	cnicopy[_at_]sunset.backbone.olemiss.edu