Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!sif.claremont.edu
From: dhosek@sif.claremont.edu (Hosek, Donald A.)
Newsgroups: trial.misc.legal.software
Subject: Re: Email `shrink-wrap licence' ?
Message-ID: <7256@jarthur.Claremont.EDU>
Date: 25 May 90 07:44:58 GMT
References: <23371@adm.BRL.MIL>
Sender: news@jarthur.Claremont.EDU
Reply-To: dhosek@sif.claremont.edu
Followup-To: trial.misc.legal.software
Organization: Harvey Mudd College
Lines: 25

In article <13796:May2507:39:4090@stealth.acf.nyu.edu>, brnstnd@stealth.acf.nyu.edu writes...
>Certainly once you've received a copy of the software, you're not bound
>by any after-the-fact licenses. Shrink-wrap licenses are simply invalid.

I missed the beginning of this thread (since it's not in a group
that I read), but I'm really confused by what you're saying. What
precisely do you mean by "shrink-wrap license"? Is this when
license information is printed on a sealed package saying that by
opening the package you agree to the terms of the license (a la
Microsoft's products)?

If this is the case, why would you consider this an
after-the-fact license? How else would the vendor communicate the
license agreement? Print it on the box? (which brings up the
problem of purchasing through mail order). What about shareware
packages whose license is contained in a file in the distribution
or in the program itself.

-dh

---
Don Hosek                         "When I was younger, I would throw
dhosek@ymir.claremont.edu          spitballs at girls that I liked. Now,
dhosek@ymir.bitnet                 I beg and plead for dates. Frankly, the
uunet!jarthur!ymir                 old way was more satisfying."