Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/3/85; site ukma.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ukma!sean From: sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) Newsgroups: net.legal,net.sources.mac Subject: Re: Is a Shareware license enforceable? Message-ID: <2424@ukma.UUCP> Date: Fri, 20-Dec-85 14:02:11 EST Article-I.D.: ukma.2424 Posted: Fri Dec 20 14:02:11 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 21-Dec-85 14:32:47 EST References: <27@decwrl.UUCP> <910@psivax.UUCP> Reply-To: sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) Organization: The White Tower @ The Univ. of KY Lines: 29 Xref: watmath net.legal:2659 net.sources.mac:795 In article <910@psivax.UUCP> friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) writes: > My impression is that the enforcibility would depend on >whether you had known of and agreed to the time constraint *before* >recieving the software. To continue the Encyclopedia Britanica example: >If they *advertised* a 30 free trial period and you *ordered* a set on >that basis then you *would* be obligated to pay at the end of the >period unless you returned the encyclopedia. In htis case the "30-day >trial" really amounts to a 30 day money-back gaurentee. On the other >hand, if they just sent you an encyclopedia out of the blue you could >keep it no matter what, and with no obligation to pay. At least that >is my impression of the current law. This is the current law, but it specifically applies to things you receive in the mail. The law is: If you didn't order it, and you get it in the mail, you get to keep it. Period. There was even a television commercial a while back by the USPS pointing this out so that people wouldn't be deceived by mail fraud. I think we need a better example that is more relevant to the freeware issue. Sean -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sean Casey UUCP: sean@ukma.UUCP or 915 Patterson Office Tower {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean University of Kentucky ARPA: ukma!sean@ANL-MCS.ARPA Lexington, Ky. 40506-0027 BITNET: sean@UKMA.BITNET