On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Kris Tilford <[email protected]> wrote: > On Apr 7, 2011, at 4:45 PM, Dan wrote: > >> But if the disc was *bundled* with a computer system when originally >> purchased then the license is NON-transferrable -- so the software and media >> must be sold WITH the computer system. Sites that permit the sale of such >> OEM softwares are doing so at their own legal risk with eye patch glued on. > > I don't profess to be a lawyer, but the logical basis for this escapes me. > If I own a car, and the engine came "bundled" with the car, I still "own" > the engine, and if I want to remove the engine and sell it to a guy who > needs an engine for his boat, and has the ability to use the engine from a > car in a boat, this seems perfectly fine to me. > > As I see it, when the computer and the software were "bundled", you paid a > "bundled" price, and part of that money was used to buy the software. The > computer would be less valuable without the software, so this means the > software adds value, and some part of the bundled payment "bought" that > software. > > If you assume the opposite, that you have no ownership rights to the > software on the physical disc, then you establish a precedent that a > physical object has no value. I can see clearly why Apple is rushing so fast > to the App Store format, and doing away with physical discs because I would > agree that ownership of bits makes no sense, after all, bits are just a > binary number, and the concept that people can "own" numbers makes zero > sense to me. If ownership of numbers is legal, then I'd like to claim > ownership of Pi, or E, or some other useful constant. > > With physical objects, I believe that payment constitutes "ownership" and > once you own the item, you're free to sell it irrespective of what the > creator of the physical object says because their rights to that physical > object ended when they accepted payment for the object. It was their choice, > and in this case Apple chose to accept payment in exchange for providing a > physical disc with software (a number) encoded onto it, and in my view, the > only logical conclusion is that Apple has NO RIGHTS to any physical discs > they have sold, bundled or otherwise. If the law is different, the law is > WRONG, and needs to be changed. > > I believe this was the exact subject of the lawsuit I cited. The company > Autodesk claimed the software was a "license", while the eBay reseller > claimed "ownership" of the physical discs. The court decided the reseller > did in fact own the physical discs, and was free to resell them as he > wished. Once the horse has left the barn, the owner of the barn has no say > on where it runs, especially when the barn owner has ACCEPTED PAYMENT for > the horse already. >
Phenomenal analogies, Kris. Very logical, too bad software companies don't see it that way. Chance -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Books, a group for those using G3 iBooks and PowerBooks (we run a separate list for G4 'Books). The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-books.html and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To leave this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g-books Support for older Macs: http://lowendmac.com/services/
