Discuss: Submission of Sybase Open Watcom Public License v.

[Forrest J Cavalier III]

> COMMENT:  This section has been added because of last year's
> Specht v. Netscape decision, which threw doubt on the validity of what =
> has
> become an accepted industry standard - of trying to make terms and
> conditions applicable (particularly in the web site context) without ma=
> king
> it clear to the user that he/she is accepting a contract and being boun=
> d by
> its terms, and without requiring some affirmative "manifestation of
> assent".

Was that paragraph supposed to say something different?

As written, it indicates that prior to Specht v Netscape there
was some way to make contract terms and conditions applicable
without making it clear to the parties.  (and that it was
an industry standard.)  That's nonsense.
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3