Re: Asimov Site

[pausch@saafNOSPAM.se (Paul Schlyter)]

In article <V9Bo5.58215$rd1.10635770@typhoon-news1.southeast.rr.com>,
**** **** <***@***.com> wrote:
 
> Frank Townsend wrote in message
> <2Pyo5.1869$hg.175400@dca1-nnrp2.news.digex.net>...
>> I think the original poster was referring not to copyright, but to
>> restrictive EULA (shrinkwrap) agreements.
>> 
>> While some of these agreements have been upheld, the one restricting resale
>> has been regarded as unconscionable, unenforceable, and, as you indicate,
>> violative of the "first sale" provision of the Copyright Act.
> 
> 
> Frank,
>     I do not wish to start an argument. In the strictest sense, everything
> you say is correct. However, that only applies if the copyrighted materials
> are "bought". It has long been the desire of softco's that they license
> their products rather than outright sale. In some cases, they have managed
> to do so quite easily, in others, particularly consumer software, they have
> had trouble making it clear to everyone that it is licensed, not sold. The
> momentum is is their direction, and maybe within a decade, it will be the
> norm that you 'license' copyrighted materials, instead of buying them. All
> they have to do, is tie it to a particular machine, and any attempt to force
> it to run on another machine violates DMCA. Also, when this is the norm, the
> climate for those that resell older historical software despite its eula
> will chill rather quickly, wouldn't you say? What doesn't hold up now might
> just be enforceable in the near future. But since the goverment says so, it
> must be a good thing.
 
You mean if my computer would malfunction and I had to bouy another one,
then I would have to buy all new software to it as well?  Quite horrible,
and certainly a very good reason to stop buying commercial software
and instead go for opensource software -- don't you think so?
 
BTW consider this:
 
# I do not wish to start an argument. In the strictest sense,
# everything you say is correct. However, that only applies if the
# books are "bought". It has long been the desire of book publishers
# that they license their books rather than outright sale.  In some
# cases, they have managed to do so quite easily, in others,
# particularly consumer books, they have had trouble making it clear to
# everyone that it is licensed, not sold. The momentum is is their
# direction, and maybe within a decade, it will be the norm that you
# 'license' books, instead of buying them. All they have to do, is tie
# it to a particular armchair or sofa, and any attempt to read it from
# another armchair violates DMCA. Also, when this is the norm, the
# climate for those that resell older historical books despite its eula
# will chill rather quickly, wouldn't you say? What doesn't hold up now
# might just be enforceable in the near future. But since the goverment
# says so, it must be a good thing.
 
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter,  Swedish Amateur Astronomer's Society (SAAF)
Grev Turegatan 40,  S-114 38 Stockholm,  SWEDEN
e-mail:  pausch at saaf dot se   or    paul.schlyter at ausys dot se
WWW:     http://hotel04.ausys.se/pausch    http://welcome.to/pausch