The capitals are generally a response to the "conspicuous" requirement of the UCC:
(2)Subject to subsection (3), to exclude or modify the implied warranty of merchantability or any part of it the language must mention merchantability and in case of a writing must be conspicuous, and to exclude or modify any implied warranty of fitness the exclusion must be by a writing and conspicuous. Language to exclude all implied warranties of fitness is sufficient if it states, for example, that "There are no warranties which extend beyond the description on the face hereof."
I don't know if the definition of "conspicuous" has ever been tested in court, but that's the idea. I'd be interested to see it used as ammunition against clickwrap EULAs, though.
(2)Subject to subsection (3), to exclude or modify the implied warranty of merchantability or any part of it the language must mention merchantability and in case of a writing must be conspicuous, and to exclude or modify any implied warranty of fitness the exclusion must be by a writing and conspicuous. Language to exclude all implied warranties of fitness is sufficient if it states, for example, that "There are no warranties which extend beyond the description on the face hereof."
I don't know if the definition of "conspicuous" has ever been tested in court, but that's the idea. I'd be interested to see it used as ammunition against clickwrap EULAs, though.