and its specific SelectPhone product, it could require customers to agree to its terms on how to use the product, including a prohibition on copying the information therein regardless of copyright protections. Finally, the circuit court held that a shrinkwrap license, when used for a product that can be returned if the buyer disagrees with the larger agreement inside the package, constitutes a valid and enforceable contract. The court relied primarily on the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) sections 2-204 (describing a valid contract) and 2-606 (describing the offering and acceptance of a contract). Zeidenberg had been offered the opportunity to read the license agreement inside the package and agree by continuing to use the software (which he had done), or refusing by returning the package to the retailer. In particular, the circuit court noted that "the opportunity to return goods can be important" under the Uniform Commercial Code. Impact The Seventh Circuit's ruling in ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg was quickly praised by legal commentators, largely in the business law community, for confirming the applicability and enforceability of shrinkwrap licenses, which had been a rising trend at the time but without settled law. However, some pro-consumer commentators criticized the ruling's acceptance of a business model in which a consumer was required to buy a product and open it first, and then take additional steps to return the product to the retailer and seek a refund (which would be questionable with an opened and possibly damaged package) if they disagreed with the terms of the contract. The ruling also received some criticism, in agreement with Zeidenberg's argument, that ProCD intended to use contract law to indirectly enforce control over un-copyrightable facts such as phone numbers. See also Boilerplate contract References United States computer case law Software licenses United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit cases United States contract case law 1996 in United States case law