[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Interesting 1st sale-shrinkwrap-EULA-(c)infringementcase
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Interesting 1st sale-shrinkwrap-EULA-(c)infringementcase
- From: Noah silva <nsilva(at)atari-source.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 10:47:25 -0500 (EST)
- In-Reply-To: <email@example.com>
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
> The assent issue has been hotly debated, but may be irrelevent. Many courts
> have asked whether a clickwrap actually is "assent" sufficient to enter into a
> contract. Most have ruled that it is an attempt to modify the contract of sale,
> and under the Uniform Commericial Code requires a documented assent. A few
> courts have said that it is part of the original "money now, terms later"
> agreement, so that the act of continuing indicates assent.
that's laughable. How about I "sell" you my house.. money now, terms
later. How can you assent if you don't know the terms. Also, at the very
_least_ EULAs are contracts of adhesion, which don't carry much weight.
-- noah silva