[jgfoot]

Ah, warranty disclaimers. Here, lawyers are limited in how they may write contracts, because consumer protection laws require that disclaimers of warranty must be written in a certain stylized manner that is in theory easier for otherwise unsophisticated consumers to read. What's with the capitals? The Uniform Commercial Code says that a disclaimer of warranty in a contract of sale must be "conspicuous" to be valid. It gives only one example of how something can be conspicuous: all capitals. Believe it or not, there are cases dealing with whether, for example, lower-case boldface printed on the opposite side of the signature page is "conspicuous." This was part of a pro-consumer movement, designed to help the little guy by making it hard to hide damaging parts of a contract--the part that says "you're on your own if this thing breaks." This all-caps rule has held out over decades, despite the innovation of several improved typesetting techniques and significant improvements in literacy since the 1930s, when most states enacted this statute.

The UCC also says that using the words "as is" is an effective way to disclaim warranties. So, lawyers put that in. Your version doesn't. That doesn't make yours wrong. It does marginally reduce the probability that your version will work in court. So, most lawyers keep it in.

Curious? Read more: http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-316.html

[lucumo]

Thank you for the explanation.

It's somewhat ironic that there is an "it should be easy to spot" kind of rule, but not an equivalent "it should be easy to comprehend". In theory it could be printed in a 2cm font and be completely unreadable at the same time :(

[pelle]

Thank you very much for that link. That explains a lot. I guess it's up to us to create new precedence.