TY - JOUR
T1 - A call for judicial activism
T2 - Rapid technological developments and slow legal developments
AU - Svantesson, Dan Jerker B
PY - 2011
Y1 - 2011
N2 - In most regards, the recent judgment in Gammasonics Institute for Medical Research Pty Ltd v Comrad Medical Systems Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 267 (‘the Gammasonics case’) is rather uninteresting. In fact, taken at face value, the only interesting aspect of the case is that it contains a discussion of one significant legal question: that is, under what circumstances can software be classed as ‘goods’? That is no doubt an important question, not least as such a classification may determine whether a buyer of software is entitled to rely on the terms implied under the various state Sale of Goods Acts.
AB - In most regards, the recent judgment in Gammasonics Institute for Medical Research Pty Ltd v Comrad Medical Systems Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 267 (‘the Gammasonics case’) is rather uninteresting. In fact, taken at face value, the only interesting aspect of the case is that it contains a discussion of one significant legal question: that is, under what circumstances can software be classed as ‘goods’? That is no doubt an important question, not least as such a classification may determine whether a buyer of software is entitled to rely on the terms implied under the various state Sale of Goods Acts.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053258736&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1037969X1103600107
DO - 10.1177/1037969X1103600107
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:80053258736
SN - 1037-969X
VL - 36
SP - 33
EP - 35
JO - Alternative Law Journal
JF - Alternative Law Journal
IS - 1
ER -