Better Shrink Wrapped License | |||||||||||||||||
Even before you open up shrink wrapped license, you have opened up the packaging and thus made it impossible to return the product. Why not create a generic software license that you don't have to read. A firm could statte that it is using the ABA-approved license. If it wanted to do anything differently, it could then just say how it is different. This idea was posted by someone in the why-not community but lost during our upgrade. I have recreated it as best I can from memory
Barry Nalebuff, Oct 31 2003
What do you think of this idea or comment? | |||||||||||||||||
Users who liked this idea also liked: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Add your comment
That idea was posted by me ... I wondered where it went. Thanks for the re-post!
it called a commercial license, figure on paying a lot more for the product though.
How about a GPL? :)
There has been a lot of discussion on various forums about challenging "EULA" (i.e. shrink wrapped and/or "click to accept" licenses as potentially being illegal and/or unenforable.
More specifically there are serious issues with the fact that many such systems (Microsoft being one specifically but not the only one) result in individual employees "clicking here to accept" agreements which are then difficult, if not impossible, to locate. In the case of corporations few employees have the legal authority to agree to a contract on the corporation's behalf, and frequently the corporation has signed a negotiated contract with the software vendor (for example, a site license agreement with Microsoft) that may (possibly, but hasn't been tested in court that I know of) override the agreements indivuals "clicked" through to...
A standard agreement would be a helpful starting point.
[full disclaimer, My company sells a legal contract compliance repository so this is an issue I have some vested interest in]