[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Psystar/Apple/First sale on Groklaw

From: Alan Mackenzie
Subject: Re: Psystar/Apple/First sale on Groklaw
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:49:18 +0000 (UTC)
User-agent: tin/1.6.2-20030910 ("Pabbay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-RELEASE (i386))

Rjack <> 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).

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]