On the basis of the Council of Local Advisers, we believe that traditional contraction agreements will likely be implemented in countries such as Canada, France, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Hong Kong. Subject to consumer protection legislation, reduction agreements should also be implemented in Mexico, Argentina and Chile. Applicability is less secure in Japan and Korea and unlikely in Germany, the United Kingdom, China and possibly Australia. In the United States, the court`s position on the feasibility or othery of retractable packaging is by no means clear. While some cases follow ProCD v. Zeidenberg, which has maintained enforceable retractable film contracts, follow klocek v. Gateway, Inc., who found the contracts to be unenforceable. Several legal attempts have been made to treat the corap reduction agreement in accordance with consumer consent, but court decisions are divided. Therefore, there is no clear reason for the legal status of packaging or reduction agreements in the United States. Although only China appears to refuse to directly implement click-wrap agreements, other countries may also complicate implementation due to a combination of factors, including local language requirements and changes in consumer protection legislation.

In particular, the European Union Directive on Remote Consumers gives the right to revoke electronic agreements without reason within seven days of the buyer receiving written confirmation of these agreements. The use of this type of agreement has become the legal paradigm of licensing by the software industry for consumer mass market software. The term „retractable film“ derives from the fact that such agreements were once found outside the packaging of the software, apparently by the clear plastic retraction film that sealed the packaging. While the applicability of Shrink Wrap software licensing contracts, as currently used by the software industry, may be questionable, users should not expect the software to be freely copied. In the case of ProCD, it was thoughtless data – phone lists. Zeidenberg did not copy and broadcast ProCD`s original copyrighted software search engine; He created his own. Had he copied the proCD software and distributed it on its website, it would probably have been held responsible for copyright infringements, regardless of the impratibility of the narrowed packaging. At the international level, internet companies face a dilemma. The applicability of click-wrap agreements is the safest for large non-consumer organizations (for example. B, B2B transactions), but given the decrease in the number of contracts and the high dollar values, it may be worth executing a traditional contract (paper). However, click-wrap agreements may be another matter. Click-Wrap licenses can be applied more easily in most of the countries mentioned above, as the policyholder can check the terms and conditions before agreeing and answering in the affirmative.