Read pages 247-249 in your textbook on Clickwraps and Shrinkwraps, including the Specht case. Summarize what you have learned Comment on one of your feWow classmates pasts SPECHT v. NETs CAPE CoMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION Second Circuit Court at Aapeals, 2002 CASE SUM MARY Facts: A group of plaintiffs sued Netscape, claiming that Web page advertised the benefits of smart-Download, and two of the company's products illegally captured private near the bottom of the screen was a tinted button labeled information about files that they downloaded from the "Download The plaintiffs clicked to download. If instead of Internet. The plaintiffs alleged that this was electronic they had scrolled further down, they would eavesdropping, in violation of two federal statutes. have seen an invitation to "review and agree to the terms of From Netscape's Web page, the plaintiffs had down- the Netscape SmartDownload software license agreement." loaded SmartDownload, asoftware plug-in that enabled them By clicking the appropriate button, they would have been to download the company's Communicator software. The sent to a series of linked pages, and finally arrived at a license 86 F.3d 147 17th Cir. 1996, is the leading case to enforce shrinkwrap agreements (and, by extension, click Gawanay, 104 F. Supp. 1332 (D. an. 2000), is wraps). one of the few cases to reject such contracts. Kloai, however, was dismissed to reach the fedetal for failure court $75,000 jurisdictional level