|
For every precedent there's another precedent holding the opposite. (Rule of thumb, not necessarily statement of fact.) Different courts are free to choose which precedent they apply. There are numerous precedents stating that shrink-wrap licenses aren't valid because the buyer doesn't know the terms of the license before opening it (and accepting the terms, according to the license)-and also because there's no chance for negotiation. If a trial over this is held in the 9th District it's likely that the precedent set by the 9th District Court might be held to apply-but if it's held elsewhere it might not.
Also I recall a number of years ago that an author (or maybe a publisher) printed a license in the front of his pbooks. Don't remember what happened, just remember that it purported to prohibit resale of his books.
|