Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Purchasing Fruit: a disappointment

Author: Chris Conkie

Date: 12:08:43 09/26/05

Go up one level in this thread


On September 26, 2005 at 14:57:24, Frank Mueller wrote:

>On September 26, 2005 at 14:05:29, Chris Conkie wrote:
>
>>The point is it's legally binding. When you break the seal of the software you
>>are beholden to the license whether you read it or not.
>
>Sorry, Chris, that's not always correct. For example, according to German civil
>law clauses within *general* terms and conditions (i. e. provisions not
>negotiated individually between the parties but predetermined by one party) will
>not be binding for a private customer if the respective clause contains a highly
>surprising provision you normally wouldn't expect in that field of business.

I don't think we disagree and that is why I answered Dann as I did. "surprising
provision" no doubt, but what if it is the "unsurprising" ... "you may install
this on only one computer".

>Such clauses might be legally ineffective even if this person read / don't read
>them before he/she breaks the seal. ;-)

True, but no with "unsurprising" license agreements.

>You will find corresponding provisions in other European Community jurisdictions
>and also in U. S. federal states consumer laws.
>
>Frank

Yes, customer protection exists here as well for unreasonable/unscrupulous
licence agreements, but not for reasonable ones. Reasonable ones win in court
mostly.

Hope this explains what I mean exactly.

Chris



Chris



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.