What is the Lawyer’s argument that the software purchase was a sale of goods for purposes of UCC Articles 2?
The Lawyer quantifies the software to be good, which he transacted with the seller. He is of the opinion that the transaction he made with the seller is legally binding. His arguments, though, are not founded based on the law on the sale of goods for the purposes of UCC articles 2. His interpretation is wrong given the fact that he regards the software to be good, which he bought from the seller. In such instances where he bought software online, there is a higher likelihood that he made a huge mistake in the installation of the same software. He might have had a stronger case if he had decided to have bought the software and chosen the CD version, which is delivered to his doorstep. This could have changed his fortunes tremendously as he could have bought a tangible product which he could claim as evidence. In such a situation, the warranty on the product’s use and installation would have been valid, and he would have had an even stronger case. In this instance, he is on the losing end as he restricts his argument on UCC Article 2.
I concur with your argument that the Lawyer will be on the losing end on this case. His argument is weak if he decides to use UCC Article 2 as the law, which he can use against the seller. Ethically he has a very strong case against a big software seller, and he can actually bargain for an even larger settlement offer, but only if he changes his argument. Proving to the court that the software is the cause of all the damages he has endured will be difficult in this instance.