Distinction between UCC and UCITA - Essay Example

UCITA offers a constitutional framework better suited for the information perspective.

This difference rises in essence because computer information is a different thing from manufactured goods i. e; information (software) and hardware have no common ground as for as their development and their utilization are concerned. As information (software) has no physical feature, therefore, a knowledgeable buyer of computer information can easily disassemble, reconfigure, replicate, and, in whole or in part, make that information available at low cost to thousands or even millions of non-buyers.

Moreover, both software and hardware developer emerged as major economical players and each has its legal concern. Hence selling of computer information demands that there should be a contractual method that protects the copyright concern of its developer or in more typical term transfer of computer information involves Licensing a different and new thing in conventional contract law.

The licensing designates the right to use and the right to make copies under terms and conditions as agreed upon by both the consumer and producer. On the other hand, selling goods signify the permanent transfer of physical ownership to someone else. It does not involve the risks to copy or reproduce to a greater extent. Hence a hard good can anticipate a relatively limited set of uses for the product among the entire set of consumers. Facing a wider and more uncertain set of potential uses of computer information - especially computer programs - providers of information will often include in their licenses an entirely different set of warranty obligations and performance disclaimers as well as other provisions even more unique to information (Priest, 2).

To address the licensing issues a decade ago a new Article 2B of the Uniform Commercial Code was inducted. As the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) and of American Law Institute (ALI) were the traditional partners in the development and maintenance of the entire UCC, as the debate went on, both NCCUSL and ALI express a different opinion over the treatment of many of the difficult center issues presented by this area of the law. Hence ALI disapproved the draft Article 2B of UCC.

Soon after NCCUSL pulled itself out of the project and projected it to the NCCUSL membership for acceptance as a self-supporting Uniform Act to successfully outwit the objections of the ALI. Since ALI had no role in NCCUSL's non-UCC uniform law process. The text of proposed Article 2B was re-formulated as the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act and was approved by the NCCUSL membership at its Annual Meeting in July 1999 (UCITA Project - Memorandum, 5). Works cited Priest, G. L. "ABA Resolution concerning the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act".