UCITA Approved In Maryland

Anonymous Coward writes: "According to this, Maryland's governor has approved UCITA. It makes me ashamed to be from Maryland." This isn't a surprise...let's just note it for the record, shall we?

No Room for Discussion

[Nater]

There's really no room for discussion on this topic is there? Since it's obvious that UCITA doesn't do squat to protect consumers and has everything to do with protecting businesses, who here has anything to say except "This law sucks."

What are the chances that this thing will stand up in court, anyway? Let me think... shrinkwrap licenses and friends designed to make reviewing the license incredibly inconvenient or impossible before accepting them. Last time I checked, judges are consumers, not businesses, and I just can't see any of them upholding this crap knowing that they too will have to agree to terms they can't see.

Why isn't this on the main page?

[aidoneus]

Look at the severity of what we're talking about. When the topic of the UCITA first came up it was always front page fodder, then, after nothing being posted on it for a while suddenly it's passed and its approval goes without mention on the front page because, "it was expected?" Come on! It's not too late to challenge this, it's currently up for approval in many others states. Idly languishing by instead of continuing to actively make our voices heard will only prove that we don't care about the blatent infringement of our rights by corporations.

Re:No Room for Discussion

[Khazwossname]

That, my dear Nater, depends on just who or what is "contributing" how much to the judge in question's next "re-election campaign".

Not to mention the problems with judges who, as we on /. are all too fond of proclaiming, "just don't get it" - as in, don't understand the issues. Assuming the judge has a computer, well, maybe they're perfectly happy with their shrinkwraps. No software people have been harassing them, have they?

<rant>
Smeg. Corrupt officials passing stupid heavy-handed laws about things they don't understand because their corporate buddies asked them to. Government agencies that want to either tax the Internet or just wiretap the whole thing - depending on where their money comes from. Greedy media conglomerates that are fighting tooth and nail to make sure everyone worldwide that has ever enjoyed a movie or piece of music gives them all of their "due" cash.

Land of the free, my ass. Excuse me while I never set foot in the good ol' U. S. of A. again.
</rant>

How do we get the courts to stop this crap?

[Tassach]

As a Maryland resident and a software professional, I'm deeply disturbed by the passage of this law. I want to know how we who is going to go to court and try and get a restraining order to keep this law from being inforced, like the ACLU & EFF did with the CDA.
"The axiom 'An honest man has nothing to fear from the police'

Re:Why isn't this on the main page?

[Nater]

It was on the main page... Unfortunately, however, I've seen quite of few articles like this appear on the main page and then slip off into the oblivion of the "Truly Interested Parties Only" section, which is apparently read by about 10 people.

When is a Uniform Act not uniform?

[rhdwdg]

When it's Maryland's version of the UCITA! The legislature made extensive pro-consumer changes to the recommended act before passing it. This act could go down in history as a good thing for consumer rights in the digital age -- it lays down the new law, and brings the software industry in line with so many other industries essential for modern living.

I think it's a positive sign that Maryland's version of this inevitable legislation will be availible for review by the remaining 48 states before they finish debating the UCITA. Is anyone else of the same mind?

Re:When is a Uniform Act not uniform?

[puppet10]

Do you have a link to the legislation passed in Maryland, or at least(or better) an article explaining the differences between the UCITA passed by Maryland and that proposed?

Re:How do we get the courts to stop this crap?

[Detritus]

I doubt there are any grounds for declaring the law to be unconstitutional. As I understand it, contract law is covered by the common law, unless a statute like the UCC overrides it. The legislature is free to change the rules.

>SARCASM<
Let me take this opportunity to thank all those Maryland voters who voted for Parris Glendenning and all the other fine Democrats who have made Maryland what it is today.
>/SARCASM<

Re:When is a Uniform Act not uniform?

[Detritus]

Information on the bill (Senate Bill 142) can be found here [state.md.us], including the text of the bill and amendments, and the record of the roll call votes.

Re:How do we get the courts to stop this crap?

[Tassach]

Let me take this opportunity to thank all those Maryland voters who voted for Parris Glendenning and all the other fine Democrats who have made Maryland what it is today.

I agree. Glendenning is even worse than Shaeffer, if that's possible. He epitomizes all that is wrong with the political system. Fortunatly, he's a lame duck. Perhaps our fellow Marylanders will remove their collective heads from their collective asses next election and vote for someone who actually respects the Constitution and dosn't behave like a schoolyard bully when dealing with the General Assembly. I'm not holding my breath, considering that the local media has a "we never met a Democrat we wouldn't endorse" attitude.
"The axiom 'An honest man has nothing to fear from the police'