Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling)

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>> 
>> Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
>> 
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mergers_and_acquisitions in jeopardy as
>> > well.
>> >
>> > http://ipspotlight.com/2010/09/19/ninth-circuit-licensee-of-off-the-shelf-software-may-not-resell-used-copies-of-the-software/
>> >
>> > "Ninth Circuit: Licensee of off-the-shelf software may not resell used
>> > copies of the software
>> 
>> That still glosses over the very small factoid that the copies in
>> question in this case were superseded by reduced-price _upgrades_ where
>> the upgrade licensing conditions included an agreement to destroy the
>> original media.  Where "destroy" does not mean resell them on Ebay.
>> 
>> This is significantly different from copies retired without upgrade, for
>> example by buying new _full_ versions rather than updates.
>
> So if they had not upgraded on the cheap with the destroy proviso
> could they have sold their R14?

With better chances of making it through court?  Certainly.

> Since we dont buy this software how about we return it when we are
> finished with it noting it is in the same condition as when we got it
> and ask for our money to be refunded in full for the surplus license?

You are confused (what else is new?).

First sales right is not about returning a book or other media once you
are through with it for a full refund.

If it were, we wouldn't need libraries.

-- 
David Kastrup