On Jun 3, 2009, at 6:26 PM, David E. Smith wrote: > So you actually don't have any documentation that resale of Cisco gear > transfer the IOS license, thus making the gear usable (in Cisco's > eyes) > to the second-hand buyer. Gotcha. > Do you have any actual documentation where Cisco successfully sued the parties involved in a resale? Gotcha
> While I believe they'd be in the legal right to start shutting down > eBay > auctions and resale businesses, they know it'd be a PR nightmare. > What gives you that belief? What legal concept would allow for such a thing? > Cisco likely turns a blind eye to this sort of thing for the same > reason > many software companies are somewhat ambivalent about the rampant > piracy > of their software. They don't lose that much in real sales (John Q. > Highschooler wasn't about to spend $1000 on Photoshop anyway), and > if he > has a talent for art and gets a Real Job, it's very likely his > employer > will insist on using properly-licensed software instead of that > pirated > copy that came with a keygen and a bonus Trojan. > Cisco doesn't turn a blind eye at all. They don't want a grey market for their gear. They have written a license, created a policy, and have put forth various efforts to convince people against the resell of their product. The fact that millions of dollars worth of Cisco resale goes on tells how ineffective these techniques are. Of course, the best part is that their policy's biggest advocates are their competitors. Too often these competitors find their new products priced similar to used Cisco products. And the used Cisco product still wins! Not on merit or anything, but Cisco owns the majority of the market and they control the majority of the labor pool who makes product decisions. Anyway... I don't stand to benefit by scaring people away from Cisco. I am also not stuck using non-Cisco gear in my network where I feel some need to attack Cisco. Cisco gear may not be the best on the market in a very category, but it is hard to argue the gear isn't good and effective. It is also hard to reconcile the fact that there is a huge labor pool of Cisco trained and experienced professionals. Any successful business knows that people are the hardest part when one tries to scale a business. Picking Cisco makes that easier. Now on to the actual argument. Can Cisco sell a piece of hardware with included software required to run it, force the owner of the hardware to accept a license in order to use it and subsequently tie a future owner of the hardware that acquires it from the original owner to the terms of the license? No. The license is simply unenforceable. There is a ton of case law to support this and Cisco knows it. Further, their suggestion that they have these rights, but thus far have failed to enforce them only furthers their inability to enforce the license terms. Does that mean you can move software images from device to device without a license? No. Does that mean you can buy some router and install any software you want on it without a license? No. -Matt -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
