You purchase a software program, at a store or on the Internet, and begin to install it. Almost immediately you are confronted with a dialog box saying you have to agree to a long, dense legal document in order to proceed. Having better things to do with your life, you don't bother reading it and instead just click "OK" to continue the installation. After you're done, you discover the product doesn't work for whatever reason. Too bad, the software publisher tells you, by clicking "OK" you signed away any rights you might have to return the product.

   ADVERTISEMENT
  

Free IT resource

Virtualization Insights from Top Experts - Learn how virtualization gets real!

Sponsored by Dell

Free IT resource

TechNet: More ways to know it, share it, and keep it running.

Sponsored by Microsoft

RELATED LINKS
»  AT&T buys high-speed wireless spectrum for $2.5 billion
»  Update: Sprint chief Forsee resigns
»  IT trainer offers master's degree for hackers
»  Wireless RSS feed 

IDG ENTERPRISE NETWORK
• More Network LAN/WAN News...  (ComputerWorld)
• Wireless EV-DO on board  (ComputerWorld)

TOP NEWS 


IT SOLUTION SEARCH

In essence, this is what UCITA is all about. From the early days of personal computers, many packaged software products have come with "shrinkwrap" licenses -- a set of terms written by the software publisher that usually disclaim all responsibility for delivering a functioning product other than perhaps warranting the delivery media be defect free for 30 days. As the purchaser is only able to read the license after the product is purchased and the package opened (hence the name shrinkwrap), the customer has theoretically given up all rights to demand a return or repair by the time he or she actually begins using the product.

In practice, however, it's not been that simple. Courts have historically frowned on such "contracts of adhesion" -- non-negotiable terms presented post sale. Instead, they have often chosen to disregard shrinkwrap licenses totally or in part and apply other legal principles from common law, copyright law, or laws regarding the sale of goods to disputes involving software products. As a result, there is a great deal of uncertainty about just what laws do apply to software transactions. And with the emergence of e-commerce , open-source software, and b-to-b Internet transactions, the need for more certainty in the laws governing a variety of software-based transactions has become even more critical.

Instead of reaching a fair balance between the needs of the software community for licensing certainty and the rights of users, UCITA stacks the deck in favor of large licensors. By making terms commonly found in most shrinkwrap and clickwrap licenses completely enforceable, UCITA could deprive customers of traditional fair-use rights while allowing software and Internet companies to escape any consequences for unsafe or poorly tested products. At the same time, UCITA permits licensors to hide their license terms until after the customer has purchased the product, making comparison shopping for the best terms a practical impossibility.

The many controversial aspects of UCITA have forced supporters to reluctantly agree to a continuing stream of amendments, attempting in vain to fix the model law’s many flaws. States that have enacted it so far have adopted versions differing in significant details from each other and from the model law itself. Legislatures in several states have felt compelled to enact anti-UCITA “bombshelter” laws to protect their residents and businesses from having their transactions governed by a UCITA law passed in another state. Far from promoting uniformity and certainty, UCITA guarantees vendors and consumers alike many more years of confusion about the rules that apply to software.