A Fatal Blow to Shrinkwrap Licensing?

GripeLog ^ | 20 December 2004 | Ed Foster

[ShadowAce]

Tech ping

[Captain Peter Blood]

Of course she could have reshrink wrapped the boxes and then have taken them back. I've done that before just to get around those kind of rules.

[ShadowAce]

Being honest, though, she got the laws changed. I wonder how much it cost her?

[KoRn]

This is great! I was wondering about this today. What if I buy software from BestBuy. I open it and choose no because I don't agree with the 'fine print'. Can I get a refund? Funny I'm reading about this very thing happening on FR .

[claudiustg]

So what's she going to run her computer with, indignation?

[Righter-than-Rush]

>>I've done that before just to get around those kind of rules.>>

I wish it was that easy with these damned pressed-plastic cases that CDs and small hardware peripherals come in. SHould I sue Microsoft for me cutting myself opening one of those stupid boxes?

[Alberta's Child]

I never really thought about this issue, but the more I think about it the more idiotic the "shrink-wrap license" arrangement sounds.

It's sort of like having Ford or Toyota offer you an extended warranty on a new car that gets automatically voided once the buyer inserts the key into the ignition.

[KoRn]

Now if they don't show you the terms before you buy, you can take the software home, burn it, and take it back for a refund. Very bad for business.....very bad

[longtermmemmory]

Car dealers used to do this by having addendum terms in the glovebox after you bought the new auto. Usually in the owners manual. Courts shot that down.

[Light Your World]

Now if only we could get rid of pre-installed operating systems on new computers.

[zeugma]

While this is a fairly good thing, it is not quite the ground-breaking decision that the article has made it out to be. MS and other companies will still be able to use the same burdensome licenses that they've had before, but now they have to have a URL pointing to them printed on the box. Big woop. For this to have actually been effective as a consumer remedy, they should have been forced to include the license itself on the packaging so it can be read by the consumer at the point of sale.

Pointing someone to a website that can change at any time is pretty darned ineffective IMO. We've seen these licenses get worse, and worse each year. Did the folks who eagerly lapped up the XP-SP2 fix have any choice but to accept the licenses proffered by microsoft if they wanted to have the fix applied to the defective software they'd previously purchased? Some choice. Either continue to use a demonstratively defective product, or agree to a new, and even more restrictive license than you had before.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Well..............things are gonna get interesting!!!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

I am liking Linux better and better.....

[Light Your World]

I would think an easy solution would be the one I use with my commercial software products: have the customer read, agree to, and sign the license before selling him/her the software package.

If Best Buy, etc, can automatically print rebate info at the cash register, why can't they print software licenses, too?

[TheConservator]

Cost her? Are you kidding?

A plaintiff in a class action suit like this pays nothing. She gets to be named as a plaintiff, and when the suit settled, she got a little payoff as part of the settlement. I know, I was such a plaintiff once.

The plaintiff's attorneys finance cases like these. And you can bet they got a big payoff in attorneys fees as part of the settlement.

Understand the way class action suits work: (1) a plaintiff's attorney finds a somewhat questionable practice, like in this case; (2) the plaintiff's attorney finds a plaintiff to act as class plaintiff to bring suit; (3) the plaintiff's attorney negotiates a settlement with the defendants that requires the defendants to make some de minimis changes to whatever questionable practice it was engagiing in--while reserving to itself the substance of the right to continue to engage in whatever the questionable practice was; and (4) the class plaintiff and the plaintiff's attorneys get paid off.

The plaintiff wins--she gets a payoff. The plaintiff's attorneys win--they get a big legal fee. And the defendants win--they get to insulate the substance of the questionable practices enshrined in the collusive settlement from further legal challenge.

[quantim]

Just wait until you buy that $5000 laptop with a wireless DVD feed (in the near future) and it comes pre-packaged with an array of 'upgradeable' software programs.  The ugliness has not even begun.

[Political Junkie Too]

Now if they don't show you the terms before you buy, you can take the software home, burn it, and take it back for a refund.

According to the article, the terms are available on the website for review.

I would have hoped to see a printed copy available at the store for impulse buyers to see, if they wish. It is unreasonable to expect a person to browse a selection of software, then go home and view the EULA, and then go back to the store to buy the software.

However, if the stores train their sales staff to offer the buyer to use the in-store computer to view the EULA on the supplier's website, that would be the best alternative.

-PJ

[technomage]

Of course she could have reshrink wrapped the boxes and then have taken them back. I've done that before just to get around those kind of rules.

Except that they usually put the code sticker right where you open the wrap. It is usually torn apart when you open. Hard to replace that.