1

In this answer it is noted that if your browse-wrap terms of service on your web site are sufficiently prominent to put the user on "inquiry notice", essentially so that they're aware that there are in fact terms of service, and the contract terms themselves are reasonable, then browsing your web site can be made to actually form a contract with your visitors.

Does this only work online? Or can you print out the whole web site, bind it up into a book, write "Use subject to terms!!!! See page 1!" on thee cover or at the top of every page, and then form a contract with readers of the book?

You might say something like:

By opening this book past page 3, you agree not to rely on this book's information for important things more than 1 year after its publication date (and if you do you agree not to try to sue the publisher for damages), and if you want to sue the publisher at all you agree to do it in California.

These sorts of terms are very common in online terms of service and so might be reasonable enough to be enforceable.

This wouldn't be a license to the content of the book, but rather contractual terms that one assents to by interaction with the physical object, after having notice that that interaction would constitute accepting a contract. But instead of "tap this region on your phone screen if you agree", it is "turn this page in your book if you agree".

Proving that someone actually took the required action might be challenging, but if they are trying to sue you in Nebraska because they got hurt after relying on information on page 17, they probably have to admit to opening the book to see it.

5
  • 1
    Perhaps you ought to distinguish between a purchaser of the book, vs someone casually browsing it in a bookstore or library. Because I presume that would affect any answer... Commented May 31 at 16:32
  • Ever Heard the term shrinkwrap? Like on toner cartridges?
    – Trish
    Commented May 31 at 16:52
  • @Trish I believe the toner cartridge shrinkwrap licenses revolved around the software on the metering/authentication chips that are part of the cartridge, as this avoided patent exhaustion doctrine. It was an explicit attempt to turn it into a software licensing issue.
    – user71659
    Commented May 31 at 19:19
  • @user71659 No, It was about customers being barred from giving cartridges to refillers, and they shed the wrong party, the refiller, not the breaching customers.
    – Trish
    Commented Jun 1 at 6:31
  • @Trish Nope, the central argument by Lexmark was software licensing, to avoid the limitations of patent exhaustion and the fact the cartridges were sold and the user had clear title.
    – user71659
    Commented Jun 1 at 17:52

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .