warranties

[John Cowan]

Carol A. Kunze wrote:


> The question is, could a supplier provide a free download version of Linux,
> and then "sell" printed documentation and installation service together for
> $29.95. Based on what I just paid for a book on how to use one of my
> software programs that looks like a good deal to me.

Sure.  In fact, one could package the download/installation, or the
first part thereof, as a Windows program, and sell it to people who
have Windows preinstalled (i.e. nearly everyone).  In that case
the box would contain a floppy disk, but would not contain "Linux"
as such.

This business method is dedicated to the public domain; I disclaim
all patents on it.


>> Remember, we aren't talking about liability here. If Redhat is 
>> so stupid as to not honor returns (which is what the standard limited 
>> warranty is in every other industry),

Indeed, the Microsoft EULA provides for replacement within 90 days
if the product does not conform to its documentation, though it
disclaims all other warranties including implied ones (insofar
as local law permits).

Here is the relevant passage from the EULA packaged with Word 95:

# LIMITED WARRANTY. Microsoft warrants that (a) the SOFTWARE PRODUCT
# will perform substantially in accordance with the accompanying written
# materials for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of receipt,
# and (b) any Support Services provided by Microsoft shall be
# substantially as described in applicable written materials provided to
# you by Microsoft, and Microsoft support engineers will make
# commercially reasonable efforts to solve any problem issues. Some
# states and jurisdictions do not allow limitations on duration of an
# implied warranty, so the above limitation may not apply to you. To the
# extent allowed by applicable law, implied warranties on the SOFTWARE
# PRODUCT, if any, are limited to ninety (90) days.
#
# CUSTOMER REMEDIES. Microsoft's and its suppliers' entire liability
# and your exclusive remedy shall be, at Microsoft's option, either (a)
# return of the price paid, if any, or (b) repair or replacement of the
# SOFTWARE PRODUCT that does not meet Microsoft's Limited Warranty and
# which is returned to Microsoft with a copy of your receipt. This
# Limited Warranty is void if failure of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT has
# resulted from acident, abuse, or misapplication. Any replacement
# SOFTWARE PRODUCT will be warranted for the remainder of the original
# warranty period or thirty (30) days, whichever is longer. Outside the
# United States, neither these remedies nor any product support services
# offered by Microsoft are available without proof of purchase from an
# authorized international source.
#
# NO OTHER WARRANTIES. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE
# LAW, MICROSOFT AND ITS SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL OTHER WARRANTIES AND
# CONDITIONS, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
# IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
# PURPOSE, TITLE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT, WITH REGARD TO THE SOFTWARE
# PRODUCT, AND THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SUPPORT SERVICES.
# THIS LIMITED WARRANTY GIVES YOU SPECIFIC LEGAL RIGHTS. YOU MAY HAVE
# OTHERS, WHICH VARY FROM STATE/JURISDICTION TO STATE/JURISDICTION.

> Setting aside what the parties may agree to differently in a license,

A shaky business anyhow, considering that shrink-wrap licenses are
plainly contracts of adhesion.  E.g. I suspect (IANAL; TISNLA)
that shrink-wrap covenants that purport to waive the normal rule
that construes the language of a contract strictly against the drafting
party (in the AT&T public license, e.g.) are void because
against public policy.

-- 
There is / one art             || John Cowan <jcowan at reutershealth.com>
no more / no less              || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things             || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness           \\ -- Piet Hein