4 ms·

> The reason that all caps language is used is because of a history of court decisions and laws around what is required to effectively disclaim implied warranti

> The reason that all caps language is used is because of a history of court decisions and laws around what is required to effectively disclaim implied warranties. Right now, the license does not properly disclaim any implied warranties, which puts the developer at risk. Just trying to learn a bit about US law here. This part intrigued me, and from what I've Googled so far, it's because of a requirement for the warranty to be "conspicuous". [1][2] Is all caps the most commonly accepted minimum as advised by lawyers (especially when they're advising business types who couldn't care less about putting it in red or bold or something else)? [1] http://www.mslater.com/post/104847-why-are-warranty-disclaimers-in-all http://www.mslater.com/post/104847-why-are-warranty-disclaim... [2] http://www.adamsdrafting.com/all-capitals/ http://www.adamsdrafting.com/all-capitals/

DannyBee 13y ago
The all-caps is because of conspicuousness, yes, but there are other requirements. UCC, for example (most contracts/licenses for software would fall under UCC, rather than common law), says basically (I'm pasting a capsule summary from a case book, i can cite the underlying provisions in the actual code, but this summary is accurate): First, the seller must clearly and explicitly do so at the time of contracting by using words that communicate the risks that fall on the buyer. To exclude the implied warranty of merchantability, the language of the disclaimer must mention “merchantability” and, if written, must be conspicuous. To exclude the implied warranty of fitness, the exclusion must be in writing and be conspicuous. Thus, fine print disclaimer may be inoperative. If an express warranty is also given, words or conduct relevant to its creation and words or conduct tending to negate or limit a warranty must be construed whenever reasonable as consistent with each other. Any words of disclaimer or modification of warranty should be strictly construed against the seller. In general, words or conduct tending to negate or limit a warranty are inoperative to the extent that construction is unreasonable.

DannyBee 13y ago

The all-caps is because of conspicuousness, yes, but there are other requirements. UCC, for example (most contracts/licenses for software would fall under UCC, rather than common law), says basically (I'm pasting a capsule summary from a case book, i can cite the underlying provisions in the actual code, but this summary is accurate): First, the seller must clearly and explicitly do so at the time of contracting by using words that communicate the risks that fall on the buyer. To exclude the implied warranty of merchantability, the language of the disclaimer must mention “merchantability” and, if written, must be conspicuous. To exclude the implied warranty of fitness, the exclusion must be in writing and be conspicuous. Thus, fine print disclaimer may be inoperative. If an express warranty is also given, words or conduct relevant to its creation and words or conduct tending to negate or limit a warranty must be construed whenever reasonable as consistent with each other. Any words of disclaimer or modification of warranty should be strictly construed against the seller. In general, words or conduct tending to negate or limit a warranty are inoperative to the extent that construction is unreasonable.