Kongres
Asocijacije PSIHOTERAPEUTA Amerike u LosAng.1999 Cije zakljucke je prihvatila EU Asocijacija EATA 2001 u Rimu
Odeljak
koji se odnosi na koriscenje i upotrebu novih Informacionih i drugih naucnih dostignuca u Psihoterapiji
(ceo
dokument je u Arhivi ITAA za 1999god./ili EATA 2001 god.)
UCC
Article 2B and the Information Technology Industry
A large share of the
transactions in the information technology industry will be subject to proposed Article 2B. Members may receive software or
information as customer or they may license these as producers. While Article 2B is supposed to codify existing business practices,
in some instances it may change these or may prefer one of several different practices. In general, Article 2B is supposed
to provide only default rules, i.e., rules for use whenever there is no agreement on specific terms. In some instances, Article
2B may limit the ability of parties to agree to particular terms or may require that the parties take certain steps be taken
to make certain terms enforceable. Article 2B will have a number of rules that will be of importance to ITAA’s members
in their businesses. Just a few of the key issues for the Drafting Committee:
Are
shrink-wrap licenses to be permitted?
Article 2B would formally approve the use of so-called shrink-wrap
licenses. The shrink-wrap license is critical to producers who wish to restrict their customers’ use of their products
while still maintaining mass market distribution. The present draft upholds shrink-wrap licenses.
Are shrink-wrap license terms
to be controlled? Consumer critics say that the drafting committee
should regulate the terms that producers may include in shrink-wrap licenses and even should exclude some terms altogether.
Others, it should at least required be placed in conspicuous type on the face of the package. So far, the Committee has imposed
few limitations on the terms that producers may include in shrink-wrap licenses. The most important limitation: terms may
not be unconscionable. As a result or a permissive shrink-wrap policy, not only consumers, but business customers as might
well might confront obligations that they find unacceptable:
- Limitations of liability.
The software bought to back-up the customer’s hard drive instead erases it. Thanks to a shrink-wrap license, the customer
might be able only get its purchase price back.
- Choice of arbitration. When
the customer seeks to sue, the shrink-wrap license requires arbitration before a panel sponsored by a software producers’
group.
- Choice of forum. The shrink-wrap
license requires that the arbitration take place in Europe.
If you use a shrink-wrap license,
must you pay for returns? The drafting committee has considered an ABA proposal to lessen the
hardship for shrink-wrap licenses by giving customers extensive return rights, including requiring vendors to pay the costs
of return.
Are use restrictions to be permitted? Licenses of information and software often limit tightly how many people may
use licensed products, how long customers may use them, to whom customers may disclose them, whether customers may "reverse-engineer"
products, and so on. The drafting committee has rejected proposals that would have said that license restrictions can not
be more onerous than copyright law’s fair-use doctrine would permit. Some critics have suggested that this could lead
to a nightmare scenario where all information would be licensed subject to restrictions and free sales would disappear.
What warranties
would there be? UCC Article 2 provides that all goods
sold automatically come with an implied warranty of merchantability. The proposed Article 2B recognizes that in the field
of information, such a requirement would cause an unacceptable and unwise disruption of the free flow of information. Other
than in transactions in so-called published information content, will be implied warranties will continue to exist, as will
express warranties. It is the drafting committee’s job to determine the content and application of these warranties.
.
