QUESTION 2

We learned in Chapter 9 that Article 2 of the UCC is the body of law that applies to contracts whose predominant purpose is the sale of goods. The UCC introduces the idea of "merchants" and defines which sellers will be treated as merchants in a given transaction. The lecture and slides mention that the purpose of classifying certain sellers as merchants are, for the most part, to hold them to a higher standard and to protect consumers. In Chapter 10, we saw the first of several examples of holding merchants to a higher standard with the idea of a "firm offer": an offer that is irrevocable even if the offeror's right to revoke at any time has not been "purchased" by the offeree in a separate "option contract." Firm offers are a class of irrevocable offers that applies only to merchants who promise to leave an offer open for a certain period in signed writing. We will see more situations where merchants are held to a higher standard under the UCC in the coming weeks.

Before we learn about even more situations where special rules apply to merchants though, does this approach seem fair to you? Should merchants be separated from other individuals and entities that transact business in the marketplace? What might the underlying purposes of classifying certain sellers as merchants and having special rules that apply only to them be? (This is an important thing to think about before we see additional situations where merchants are treated differently.) Can you think of a situation where you dealt with a merchant in a transaction (other than routine, weekly transactions like buying groceries or other goods...)? Will knowing that such sellers are classified as merchants with special rules imposed on them give you more confidence and comfort in doing business with merchants, or is it not even something that you will think about going forward?