by Mike Masnick
Fri, Jan 8th 2010 3:03am
Just a few months ago we wrote about two separate lawsuits involving "browserwrap" or "clickwrap" agreements and whether or not they were enforceable. In the first one, an agreement was found to be enforceable even if the user on the website wasn't forced to view it, but it was just a link away. That seems to be the same view held by the court in a new ruling, that says that even if the agreement is on another page and the user never reads it, the fact that there's a link to it makes it enforceable. Frankly, I have a hard time seeing how that makes much sense, but it seems to be the way the courts are leaning. Of course, it's not all courts, though. Because the other case we wrote about a few months ago found exactly the opposite, saying that such a "browserwrap" agreement is not enforceable because the user was not adequately notified.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Supreme Court Again Makes It Clear: Companies Can Erode Your Legal Rights Via Mouse Print
- The Judicial System May Be Bad, But The Privatized Judicial System Of Arbitration Is Worse
- Apple Informs Bloggers It Will Be Using Their Content In Its 'News' App Via An Opt-Out Only 'Agreement'
- Jimmy Graham Loses $5 Million In Part For Listing Himself As A Tight End On Twitter
- Top Arbitration Lawyer Says Corporate Sovereignty System Needs 'Complete Overhaul'