Hi Jim, Thank you for putting this together. Keith Smith ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 11:16:13 AM To: Subject: UCITA (warning - it is long) > UCITA > > There is a bill in the Arizona Legislature that will, if adopted into law, > seriously harm the citizens of Arizona. HB2041 was introduced by: > > State Senator Chris Cummiskey > Assistant Senate Floor Leader > State Senator, District 25 - Central Phoenix (Current) > ccummisk@azleg.state.az.us > > State Senator Ramon Valadez > Legislative District 10 - Tucson > rvaladez@azleg.state.az.us > > State Representative Jim Carruthers > Republican -- District 5 - Yuma, Parker, Quartzsite, Wellton, San Luis > jcarruth@azleg.state.az.us > > State Representative Debra Brimhall > Republican -- District 4 - Winslow, Holbrook, Snowflake, St. Johns, > Taylor, > Springerville, Eagar, Showlow, Payson, Miami, Globe, Superior, Hayden, > Pima, > Florence, Casa Grande > dbrimhal@azleg.state.az.us > > State Representative Mark Anderson > Republican -- District 29 - western Mesa > manderso@azleg.state.az.us > > State Representative Dean Cooley > Republican -- District 21 - Mesa > dcooley@azleg.state.az.us > > State Representative Jeff Hatch-Miller > Republican -- District 26 - Phoenix > jhatch@azleg.state.az.us > > State Representative Wes Marsh > Republican -- District 28 - Phoenix > wmarsh@azleg.state.az.us > > These and indeed all the members of the Arizona Legislature need to be > informed about the consequenses of this proposed legislation. I propose > that we submit the following information to ALL Arizona legislators. > > -------------- > > The purpose of this communication is to inform you about our concerns > regarding HB 2041 - UCITA. This bill, while superficially appearing > beneficial, deserves your serious consideration. There are many provisions > of this proposed legislation that will seriously harm your constituents, > the citizens of Arizona. Please take the time to consider our objections. > > UCITA (originally titled UCC 2B) was designed and promoted by the > proprietary software industry. UCITA is a contract law statute that would > apply to computer software, multimedia products, computer data and > databases, online information, and other such products. It was designed to > create a uniform commercial contract law for these products and calls > itself "a cyberspace commercial statute." It covers contracts that are > generally known as "shrink-wrap licenses". > > Many individuals and organizations are opposing UCITA because it has the > potential to be very harmful to consumers, especially consumers of computer > products (which we all are today). Among those opposed to UCITA are the > Consumers Union, the Association of Research Libraries, a large number of > state attorneys general, and an organization to which I belong, the Phoenix > Linux User Group. > > We, as Americans, generally believe that big companies ought to be held to > a strict standard of liability to their customers because it will keep them > honest. UCITA will do the opposite. UCITA says that by default a software > developer or distributor is completely liable for flaws in a program. But > it also allows a shrink-wrap license to override the default. > Sophisticated software companies that make proprietary software will use > shrink-wrap licenses to avoid liability entirely. > > UCITA has another consequence. It gives proprietary software developers > the power to prohibit reverse engineering. This would make it easy for them > to establish secret file formats and protocols, which there would be no > lawful way for anyone to figure out. The current technological > sophistication that people enjoy today and the unprecidented access to > information that we all have via the Internet is built on a foundation of > open standards and open protocols. These standards, and their supporting > protocols, were designed, developed, enhanced, and adopted by the computing > community at large in an open, visible way. Were UCITA in effect while > these standards and protocols were being discussed, the Internet would be a > vastly different creature. It would have been created and now be > controlled and manipulated by the proprietary software companies who would > have had the ability and the power to stipulate secret standards and > protocols and prohibit the computing community from discovering those > standards and protocols under penalty of law. > > UCITA does not apply only to software. It applies to any sort of > computer-readable information. Even if you use only free software, you are > likely to read articles on your computer, access data bases, etc. UCITA > will allow the publishers to impose the most outrageous restrictions on > you. They could change the license retroactively at any time, and force > you to delete the material if you don't accept the change. They could even > prohibit you from describing what you see as flaws in the material. > > UCITA will also validate software licenses that excuse software vendors > from responsibility for "buggy" software. It will even allow vendors to > prevent users and reviewers from publicly discussing a product. Both the > ruling by the Supreme Court of the State of Washington and Microsoft's > demand to Slashdot.org to remove Internet postings about one of its > products are evidence of a disturbing erosion of customer protections in > state contract law. > > The Supreme Court of the State of Washington ruled that "not our fault" > language contained in a shrink wrap license for software was valid, even if > the customer never read the disclaimer and the software company knew about > the defect before the product was sold. In the Washington case, a > construction company made a $1.95 million error in a bid it submitted to > build a medical center because of a defect in the software. The > construction firm discovered the error only after the bid had been > accepted. The construction company sued the software developer and > distributor to recover the $1.95 million and the court ruled that a > liability waiver in the shrink-wrap license provided complete protection to > the software company. > > UCITA would make the Washington Supreme Court's ruling law in every state > that adopts the legislation. According to Skip Lockwood, director of 4CITE > (For a Competitive Information Technology Economy), "UCITA takes away > software firms' incentive to pre-test their software in order to distribute > bug-free programs. Software companies can ship programs with known > defects, secure in the knowledge that UCITA will shield them from > liability." > > In another case, Microsoft has demanded that Slashdot.org remove postings > on its web site about a Microsoft security product. Microsoft contends > that when the users downloaded the product from the Microsoft site, they > clicked on a confidentiality agreement. Therefore, users are unable to > publicly comment on the software. > > UCITA would render this click-on confidentiality agreement (and many other > onerous provisions) completely enforceable. "UCITA will allow software > vendors to bind thousands, if not millions, of people to secrecy. > Consumers and competitors will not be able to comment on or criticize the > vendor's products" according to Lockwood. > > Opponents argue that UCITA gives software manufacturers and information > services an unfair advantage and leaves consumers with very little recourse > when they find themselves with bad software. The opponents include > > 26 State Attorneys General > Association for Computing Machinery > Free Software Foundation > Consumers Union > 4CITE, a broad-based coalition of end-users and developers of > computer and information technology > Society for Information Management > IEEE > Newspaper Association ofAmerica > Motion Picture Association of America > Association of Research Libraries > and many others > > Thank you for your time. > Jim > > Bliss comes from within, ignorance from without > > ________________________________________________ > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. > > Plug-discuss mailing list - Plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss