Re: [dow1-2tf] Definition of the "Conspicuous" in US Uniform Commercial Code

[Marc Schneiders <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, at 08:45 [=GMT-0400], Neuman, Jeff wrote:

> "A term of clause is conspicuous when it is so written that a reasonable
> person against whom it is to operate ought to have noticed it. A printed
> heading in capitals is conspicuous. Language in the body of a form is
> "conspicuous" if it is in larger or other contrasting type or color. Whether
> a term or clause is "conspicuous" or not is for decision by the court.
> Conspicuous terms include the following: (A) a heading in capitals equal to
> or greater in size than the surrounding text, or in contrasting type, font,
> or color to the surrounding text of the same or lesser size; and (B)
> language in the body of a record or display in larger type than the
> surrounding text, or in contrasting type, font, or color to the surrounding
> text of the same size, or set off from surrounding text of the same size by
> symbols or other marks that call attention to the language."

Well, on the web (http) this doesn't work out like on paper. Settings
of users in their browsers overrule lay out settings (like fonts and
colours) of websites. It's in the nature of HTML.

So you put it in 48 point red Arial Bold, and I tell my browser, that
I want everything in 12 point times roman, no colours. And I see
nothing conspicious. Don't tell me it is my fault. This is how HTML
works by definition (protocol). We may have lost this feeling through
flash, stylesheets and the rest, but it is still there. And not only
in theory.