Andrew Donnellan wrote: > Of course that doesn't mean it's not required, just that the evidence > given was irrelevant. I've seen most places do it and lawyers > recommending it and so on, and as it is a legal disclaimer I think it > would be wise to use emphasised text, at least put asterisks around it > or something to draw attention.
Laws like the Uniform Commercial Code do require that disclaimers of warranty be "by a writing and conspicuous". http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/article2.htm#s2-316 I suppose you could be equally conspicuous with boldface or differently colored text. The problem is, as far as the lawyers are concerned, all caps seems to work just fine. Why use something different? At best, the court will rule it's just as good as all caps. At worst, they'll say you deviated from common industry practice, which confuses consumers, and therefore your disclaimer was *not* conspicuous. So it's not just monkey-see, monkey-do, but more like monkey-worry-about-malpractice. Arnoud -- Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
