Slashdot Mirror
UCITA Fight Comes to Texas
ILikeRed writes "Well, you mentioned this story more than once, and even gave advice on fighting it. But now the UCITA has come to Texas, my home state, so I am hoping you will send out the word, so we can show that people do not want this legislation, even if it is in Compaq's back yard. And here I thought they were supposed to be a company that got it - can anyone submit a full list of companies supporting this thing? Might be a good cause for a boycott...."
The UCITA is completely insane, not because of some of its claim, but because it's binding without any of the elements of a contract.
... ". I'd even perhaps pay for beta software if it solved a problem I'd been having. And maybe sign an NDA agreeing not to slam the product for bugs because it's still a beta. That's fine, I'd go into it knowing what I was contracting not to say and what the limits were (till out of beta.)
If you want to spell out a contract where I'm not allowed to tell others about some thing, that's fine. It's called an NDA. You have to precisely spell out what I can't tell people, I look at it, decide if I like it, and agree to it because you offer me something in return.
The UCITA doesn't require the customer to be able to see the contract for it to be binding. It allows clauses like retroactive changes (with the onus of checking for this on the customer). It allows companies to sell products that are completely different from what was advertised and sue anyone who publicises this fact.
Any of these decisions, on their own, in an informed scenario, would be okay. I occasionally buy 'as is' merchandise that isn't guaranteed to work. That's fine because this merchandise is required to be marked 'as is'. It's not enough that they say "well, it should have been obvious because of
It's only when you pass a law that makes shrinkwrap licenses, which can state any and all of this, binding that you screw the consumers.
The UCITA even allows companies to remotely disable your software if they think that you've violated the license. The incredibly broad license that could theoretically prevent make it a violation if you told your neighbor that you thought one product was better than another. And they can disclaim all responsibility for damages that this may cause. If you take any measures to prevent this (even a firewall) you could very well be tried under the DMCA for disabling an access control mechanism.
No other industry allows blanket disclaimers to be binding. If you sign a disclaimer at a hospital and they perform a sex change instead of an apendectomy you can sue them, regardless of any disclaimer you may have signed absolving them of responsibility.
If you buy a car, you can return it if it's a lemon, regardless of you having bought it. If you take that car to an independant dealer for a tune-up, they can't cancel your warranty. Ditto if you buy user servicable parts (spark plugs) to replace the ones the product came with. Ford can't cancel your warranty or sue you because you used GM-approved tires.
If you buy a TV the company can't dictate what you can play on it.
In no other industries do we allow laws that so blatantly screw the consumer.
We shouldn't accept the software companies line about how software is a new paradigm, etc. etc. We should hold them to the same rules as any other business in any other industry.
Do you honestly think that companies should be allowed to do any of that?
UCITA is not about improving the business climate by passing uniform laws. It is tailored for the benefit of and sponsored by a minority of companies within a single industry (a few big software companies). Leaving consumers aside completely, it should be pretty clear that companies outside this exclusive fraternity do not stand to benefit from this law. Indeed the measure is designed to establish new privileges for its sponsors at the expense of everyone else -- consumers, government and business at large
So, when you talk to you your rep, rather than berating them for being a rednecked toadies to business interests, maybe you should put on your suit and be very concerned about the negative affect on the TX business climate, and in particular the power it will give large out of state companies over TX.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Given that the majority of the congresscritters in the Lege are devoted to one thing and one thing only (namely "fostering a healthy biddness climate"), it's almost certain to pass in Texas[1]. This state has a long history of passing pretty much anything a business lobbyist asks for. If you need an example of this consider the grandfathering of pollution emitting plants that lead to things like the Alcoa smelter in Rockdale (one of the largest sources of airborne pollutants in texas and possibly the west becuase it has no pollution controls and burns lignite[2] at a prodigious rate; a few years back there was a ruckus over this and "something must be done!" so a "Strong Resolution" was passed that basically told the grandfathered plants they should clean up and if they didn't then the State would send them to their rooms without dessert. :-( It's easy to get real mad if you're a texas liberal.).
[1] the Lege and executive offices are all dominated by Republicans now, and even if it were the other way the Democrats here are usually so conservative they'd be Republicans anywhere else...
[2]lignite is a "soft" coal that's very common. Its main virtue is that it is cheap (easy to mine becuase it's close to the surface, and common). Its disadvantages are: it is close to the surface so usually it's strip mined, which has long-term negative effects on the local environment; and it is very high in sulfur content, the burning of which leads to SOx in the atmosphere, which is a greenhouse gas IIRC and also leads to the formation of acidic rainfall. The Rockdale smelter burns millions of tons of this crap every year.
--
News for geeks in Austin: www.geekaustin.org
News for Geeks in Austin, TX
When UCITA came to my home state, Maryland, I was informed by several consumer/library advocates that lobbyists from Microsoft and AOL were in attendence and vocally in favor of UCITA.
Here is some pro-UCITA propaganda its proponents have put up:
The Software and Information Industry Association (SIIA)'s UCITA brief; and here are the SIIA's members.
And my all-time favorite, the Business Software Alliance's Why Software Professionals Should Support [UCITA] (And What Will Happen If They Don't.
The BSA consists of Adobe, Apple, Compaq, Dell, IBM, Intel ... and, of course, Microsoft. Here is a list of member companies.
Additionally, if you want a good "Who's-Who" on UCITA, check out the comments filed at the Federal Trade Commission's recent conference on High-Tech Warranties.
If you're interested, here is a site I threw up concerning UCITA and EULAs. I wrote a letter to Maryland governor Glendening opposing UCITA, and here's the nebulous reply I got back.
Sincerely,
Vergil
Vergil Bushnell
Insects and Grafitti Photos
From InfoWorld's Gripe Line a couple weeks ago:
So it's basically software companies (and the hardware companies that are co-dependent) vs. the rest of the corporate world.
Besides, plenty of people already know that proprietary software sucks - but they still use it anyway. Open Source software and OSs are just not appealing enough to the everyday casual user, whether they be corporate or private, for people to make the switch. And because of this, UCITA will pass and consumers will be fucked. Some will make the switch to non-UCITA, Open Source software but the vast will not. Unfortunately, they will pay the ultimate price. What is even more unfair is that they will pay this price because they may not be tech savvy enough to make an informed choice for software. Consumer rights with respect to software should not be available only to the savvy users (or those savvy in legalise, who can understand many of the cryptic license agreements).
We've already seen how the RIAA and MPAA have twisted and perverted the DMCA. It should be expected that the companies supporting UCITA will do the same.
Full disclosure: I stole the link from this guy's post but it's an excellent article that should show up several times for this story.
-------
We want some answers and all that we get
Some kind of shit about a terrorist threat
- Ministry
As a Texan, I can very firmly say that I heartily disagree with the provisions in the UCITA. I can't help but wonder, though, with the sheer level of "Good ol' Boy" style corruption evident in our grand state, if this will not be forced through sooner or later because someone's kids got a scholarship at UT, or something. This sort of thing goes on all the time... If it does go through and becomes widley accepted, I wonder if companies who are in a situation that would make it hard for them to tolerate the provisions of the bill would start using and supporting Open Source projects, which are by definition immune to the idiocies found within the UCITA. Think about it. If Bell Helicopter, which produces the (in)famous 'tiltroter' helicopter were to suddenly lose its ability to operate because of a license dispute, wouldn't they be a hell of a lot more likely to use Open Source software rather than Closed Source software from the likes of M$ and Compaq? I wonder...
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
If you're still not sure why you should oppose the UCITA, Cem Kaner has a good essay you should read. This is not just another bad law. This is the bad law of the decade, which could cripple consumer choice in the software industry and throw the brakes on the biggest economic boom we've had in years (powered by those tech companies, which will suffer because of the UCITA).
Write your congressperson and get some Federal legislation to preempt the UCITA. And more importantly, write your own state representative, because the only way to defeat will probably be on a state-by-state basis.
Supporters of UCITA always point to the "Right of Return" clause saying that it gives greater protection to the consumers than they currently have.
Last year, Maryland passed UCITA which went into effect in October. I noticed that all the major software retailers (Best Buy, Staples, Office Max, etc.) still have signs saying that there is no returns allowed on opened software. Has anyone in Maryland or Virginia tried to return software because they disagreed with the license? What were your experiences?
I feel like picking a fight with everyone who thinks they are right. - Rainmakers
Why would Compaq support UCITA? Don't they owe their existence to reverse engineering?
(Compaq built the first IBM PC clone by reverse engineering the IBM BIOS)
Maybe tell them that they violated their license agreement and you are there to remove the software from their computer. After blood returns to their face explain that this situation is not far fetched....except that they can do it over the internet the weekend before the next election. No due process, no notice.
Fight Spammers!
UCITA has been introduced in the Texas Senate as SB 709 by Sen John Carona, a Republican representing District 16 in Dallas.
HB 1785 has been referred to the House Business and Industry Committee but is not yet scheduled for a hearing. Likewise, SB 709 has been referred to the Senate Business and Commerce Committee but has yet to be scheduled for a hearing. These committees will be holding hearings on the bills before the bills will go on to their respective houses for floor votes.
If you live in Texas, look up the email address of the Senator and Representative for whom you are a constituent at this page here.
If UCITA interests you, send them a short and concise email telling them about UCITA and how they should vote on it, and why they should vote that way. Be polite. Texas legislators are usually very receptive to communications from their constituents.
Expect that most legislators will not be familiar with the issues involved with UCITA, and that what education they are getting on it is probably coming from lobbyists. So help inform them.
The current legislative session will be ending in May, so if UCITA can't get passed out of committee and then passed in both houses, the software lobby will have to wait until 2003 for the next session of the legislature.
Hope this helps.
Ed
Why is this legislation so terrible? Companies need to examine their legal obligations to determine their risk. If the risk of having your software stop working is too great a risk, then don't take it. Find alternatives.
Slews of Microsoft shops will suddenly see the reason why proprietary software sucks.
Moderators: if you think this is a troll, you're on crack. I'm serious about this.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
As previously mentioned, the UTICA regulations are perhaps the worst thing ever to come out of a committee. Period.
what everyone seems to foget is the Achille's Heel of the proposals: Only Large Software Companies Benefit. Everyone, and I do mean everyone, else is hurt.
Look at some of the opposition groups/members:
While most people (including the representatives) seem to assume that Business(tm) is all for UTICA, this is simply NOT TRUE. And therein lies the way to effectively fight it:
If you can get something like this reasonably organized, when your rep gets 2 dozen angry letters from companies of all sizes and industries in his district, he's going to be reallllly cautious about the Bill, and that's what you want - serious debate, not a rubber-stamp. Because, in a serious debate, UTICA will lose. There are too many opposition members. UTICA's only hope is to ram it through (or sneak it in) before the opposition can organize. Don't Let That Happen.
-Erik, who is busily practicing what I preach here in Silicon Valley.
There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the truth, and what really happened.