• Today: October 31, 2025

procd-v-zeidenberg-shrink-wrap-license

31 October, 2025
1201
ProCD v. Zeidenberg (1996) — Shrink-Wrap License Explained in Easy English | The Law Easy

ProCD v. Zeidenberg (1996) — Shrink-Wrap License

Court: 7th Cir. Year: 1996 Citation: 86 F.3d 1447 Area: Contract & UCC Reading time: ~7 min

Author: Gulzar Hashmi Location: India Publish Date: 26 Oct 2025

PRIMARY_KEYWORDS: ProCD v. Zeidenberg, shrink-wrap license, UCC SECONDARY_KEYWORDS: software license, acceptance by use, injunction, additional terms
Hero illustration for ProCD v. Zeidenberg shrink-wrap license case

Quick Summary

ProCD sold a CD-ROM database with a license that limited “consumer” use. The buyer, Zeidenberg, bought the cheaper consumer version and used it commercially. The box warned of restrictions; the full license was inside and on-screen. The court said: when a buyer can read terms after opening and return the product if they disagree—but keeps using it—the buyer accepts those terms. The license bound him, and injunctive relief could be used to enforce it.

Issues

  • Do shrink-wrap license terms become part of the contract?
  • Can the court grant an injunction to enforce those terms?

Rules

  • If the buyer gets terms with a fair chance to reject and return, but does not return and uses the product, the buyer accepts those terms.
  • Courts may use injunctions to stop ongoing or likely breaches of valid license terms.

Facts (Timeline)

Database Build: ProCD compiled data from 3,000+ phone directories into a CD-ROM.
Dual Pricing: Lower price for consumer use; higher price for commercial users.
License Inside & On-Screen: Box flagged restrictions; full license in the package and shown at each run.
Buyer’s Conduct: Zeidenberg bought consumer version, ignored “non-commercial only,” and used it commercially.
Suit: ProCD sought an injunction to enforce the license; trial court denied, saying terms were not on the box.
Appeal: ProCD appealed the denial.
Timeline illustration of events in ProCD v. Zeidenberg

Arguments

Appellant (ProCD)

  • License terms were presented post-purchase with a right to return; keeping and using equals acceptance.
  • Dual pricing needs enforceable limits; injunction should stop misuse.

Respondent (Zeidenberg)

  • Terms not on the outside; purchase completed before seeing them.
  • License should not add new limits after sale.

Judgment

The appellate court reversed. The buyer had notice of restrictions and a chance to reject by returning the product. He used the software anyway. That use showed acceptance. The license was binding, and injunctive relief could be used to enforce it.

Judgment concept art for ProCD v. Zeidenberg

Ratio Decidendi

Where terms arrive with the product and the buyer may review and reject by returning, keeping and using the product is acceptance. Such licenses can set lawful limits on use.

Why It Matters

  • Supports enforceability of shrink-wrap and click-through terms when return rights exist.
  • Protects tiered pricing and business models for software and data.
  • Signals that conduct (use) can equal assent under modern contracting.

Key Takeaways

Assent by Use: Keep + use after seeing terms = acceptance.
Return Option: A real chance to return matters.
Enforcement: Injunction can stop continued breach.
Do Avoid
Show license clearly on install/open.Hiding key limits with no return option.
Offer easy returns/refunds.Confusing or blocked returns.
Match license to pricing tiers.Letting consumer tier be used commercially.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “OPEN • READ • KEEP = BOUND”

  1. Open: Terms arrive with the product or on-screen.
  2. Read: You get a fair chance to review and decide.
  3. Keep: Keeping/using means you accept the license.

IRAC Outline

Issue

Do shrink-wrap terms bind a buyer who can return the product but chooses to keep and use it? Can an injunction enforce such terms?

Rule

Post-purchase terms may become part of the contract when the buyer has notice, a right to return, and keeps/uses the product. Breach can be enjoined.

Application

Box warned of limits; license appeared inside and on-screen; buyer did not return and used the software commercially. Conduct showed assent; limits applied.

Conclusion

The license bound the buyer; injunction could issue to stop further violation.

Glossary

Shrink-Wrap License
Terms supplied inside packaging or on-screen, accepted by keeping/using.
Assent by Conduct
Agreement shown by actions, like continued use after notice.
Injunction
Court order to stop or compel actions to prevent ongoing harm.

FAQs

The license bound the buyer because he kept and used the software after seeing the terms and having a chance to return it.

No. A clear notice plus full terms inside/on-screen with a return option is enough.

Yes. With a valid contract and breach, injunctive relief can enforce use limits.

“Notice + right to return + continued use = assent to shrink-wrap terms.”
Reviewed by The Law Easy Category: Contract UCC Software Licensing
```

Comment

Nothing for now