Rjack <[email protected]> wrote: > Here's the point. If you are an owner of a computer program copyright, > and license someone else to make a copy of your work on a physical > medium that is owned by the licensee then "Notwithstanding the > provisions of section 106(3)" gives the licensee (the lawful owner) of > that copy of a computer program the right to dispose of that copy as > long is it a transfer of ownership but not by rental, lease, or lending.
> It's the PHYSICAL MEDIUM and not the MESSENGER that counts! Yes. But is that transfer of ownership not still subject to the license conditions? My understanding is that the court in Vernor vs. Autodesk judged that the "no sale" term in the licence was illegitimate rather than that the licence as a whole could be disregarded. In a common sense view, what Vernor was selling was a second hand Autodesk licence, not the physical copy. Presuambly, the buyer is as bound by the license as Vernor is. > Sincerely, > Rjack -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany). _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
