Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| reply to FLECOM
Re: oooo, can i sue sony now?
said by FLECOM  :can i sue sony now for hacking my pc if it does that crazy crap? Nope. Hidden EULA in the CD cover. Should the CD create complications for your computer, it's your fault. |
|
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN | AKAIK, clickwrap or shrinkwrap licenses have never officially been challenged in courts. |
|
gatzdon
join:2002-10-25
Lake Zurich, IL | The courts upheld that Lexmark's shrinkwrap license/contract was enforceable. You can find it at the EFF's website. |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA | reply to Thaler
My problem with those a EULA like that is that the user can't read it and agree to it before opening the package. And once you've opened the CD case, good luck returning it if you don't agree to the EULA. |
|
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| reply to gatzdon
said by gatzdon :The courts upheld that Lexmark's shrinkwrap license/contract was enforceable. You can find it at the EFF's website. I beleive you are referring to the Lexmark v. Static Controls case where Static Controls "reversed engineered" the chip that allowed aftermarket inkjet cartridges to work in their printers. You are right that it was decided in favor of Lexmark, however it was overturned on appeal and the SCOTUS has denied hearing the case. More info here.
--
"What gives them the right to come in and do this?" she said. - Lady complaining that she was getting FIOS in her backyard. |
|
Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| reply to Jason Levine
said by Jason Levine :My problem with those a EULA like that is that the user can't read it and agree to it before opening the package. And once you've opened the CD case, good luck returning it if you don't agree to the EULA. Hehe, I didn't say I agreed to it, but rather, that's just how things are.  |
|
gatzdon
join:2002-10-25
Lake Zurich, IL
| reply to cdru
said by cdru :said by gatzdon :The courts upheld that Lexmark's shrinkwrap license/contract was enforceable. You can find it at the EFF's website. I beleive you are referring to the Lexmark v. Static Controls case where Static Controls "reversed engineered" the chip that allowed aftermarket inkjet cartridges to work in their printers. You are right that it was decided in favor of Lexmark, however it was overturned on appeal and the SCOTUS has denied hearing the case. More info here. Aside from the fact that your article predates the 9th Circuit Court Ruling, always go to the source, articles sometimes miss the real message.
»www.eff.org/legal/cases/ACRA_v_L···ling.pdf
The court upheld that Lexmark's shrinkwrap license on their so called Prebate printers was valid and enforceable. While the court did agree that the third party manufacturer was not party to that license, they did imply that Lexmard could sue their consumers when they violate the license by not sending the empty cartridge back to lexmark or by using a third party cartridge in the Prebate printer. It's a very discouraging read.
--
$100 placed at 7 percent interest compounded quarterlyfor 200 years will increase to more than $100,000,000 --by which time it will be worth nothing.- Lazarus Long |
|
