Posted on 09/30/2009 5:29:54 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
A judge Tuesday heard arguments in a dispute over software sales that could potentially have repercussions on the secondhand sale of virtually any copyright material.
The suit was filed by Timothy Vernor, a seller on eBay, after Autodesk, citing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, asked eBay to remove some of its software products that Vernor had listed for sale there, and later to ban him from the site.
Vernor had not illegally copied the software but was selling legitimate CDs of the products secondhand. For that reason, he argued, he was not infringing Autodesk's copyright.
Autodesk countered that because it licences the software, rather than selling it outright, a licensee does not have the right to resell its products.
(Excerpt) Read more at computerworlduk.com ...
Hasn’t this been tried before?
I seem to recall some computer software suit from the 80s.
Remind me not to buy any autodesk software
This is the reason I just give my penultimate version of software away.
But Autodesk was selling licenses, which under the First Sale doctrine, are permitted to be transferred, permitting that no copies have been made.
Autodesk is full of sh*t.
It's crapola anyway, and not worth the price. I used Autocad years ago when it was a simple 2D drafting program. I now have a copy of Intellicad 2000 that was released as freeware in 2000 for playing around at home. For professional design, Solidworks is way better.
Everyone thinks they can patent the whole world. Isn’t there free software out that that’ll do what Autodesk does? This protectionist stuff never works, but they never learn...
I had almost the exact same thing happen to me about five years ago. My college’s bookstore was having a closeout sale, and I bought 34 copies of Autodesk Building Systems for educational users for $25 (total!).
I was selling them on eBay at their original price of $75 (the bookstore’s sticker was still on them). I had sold about 10 of them before my auction got taken down by eBay, and the reason was that Autodesk had requested it. Luckily, eBay didn’t shut down my account.
nobody's buying it, these days.
Kinda bouncing from one extreme to the other here, aren't you?
You don't get what you don't pay for.
SolidWorks subscriber here too. I had some engineering mag site ask me to take a poll for them. The poll was focused on the SW products that can read and edit Autocad drawings without having a seat of Autocad. Looks like our friends in San Rafael are trying to build a case for SW’s DWGGateway and DWGEditor add ins.
My guess is their market share is shrinking and they have to find ways at buolstering their bottom line to keep that prime real estate right on Hwy 101.
Perhaps not Autocad. But Maya is still very popular.
I agree, Autodesk is a compilation of acquisitions that they do not have the ability to support. I use their garbage every day and when I get home I scour the job listings for a SolidWorks opportunity.
ping
Oh, I’m a total amateur with CAD/Drawing stuff. I saw a bunch of stuff online one day that made it SOUND like it’d do everything under the sun, but it’s probably just wishful thinking. My point is that some of this patent/copyright stuff is getting ridiculous.
In some cases you do. I still haven't found a better DVD ripping program than the free Handbrake, free or for sale.
I believe it takes (or at least used to) three “copyright” infractions to get your account suspended on ebay.
That's a life lesson.
Why? Why should you take advantage of someone else's time, talent, and labor with no remuneration to them whatsover? Or are they compensated by other means?
Either way, the benefit is never without cost to someone, which is the finer point I should have made in anticipation of the usual argument.
2012 should be a big year for them.
You would have to read the EULA to know for sure. Many EULA’s specify that the license cannot be transferred or resold.
Autodesk is among the most very obnoxious companies to work with. My company has been an Autodesk customer over the years, and I’ve grown to simply despise them. We’re careful about making sure we have fully licensed copies of everything, but it seems like you can’t call them for *anything* without them first doing an in-depth investigation and audit before they’ll help. I don’t like being treated like a criminal.
Autodesk is even worse to work with than Oracle, and that’s saying something. I am SO glad not to be an Oracle customer any more. Never, ever again. Now if I can just purge the Autodesk products...
It depends on the motivation of the person or people who wrote it. People have a right under copyright to give their product away for free. In the classic model for open source, at least licenses with the give-back provision, it works two ways, both in a positive feedback loop.
A developer creates software but doesn't have the time, talent or inclination to bring it to a level he wants it at. He makes it open source, so that others who do have the time, talent or inclination can add those features to the software. The developer was compensated by having his program improved by others at no cost to him.
Example: Linus Torvalds in creating Linux didn't want to have to deal with the file system stuff, so he let others do it.
From the other side, a person or organization wants a program to do X, but doesn't have the time, talent or inclination to do it all. But they can find an existing open source project that is 90% there and add to it to meet their requirement. Their compensation was in the initial product, their payment was in giving their code back to the project.
Example: Almost every home router manufacturer uses Linux, but in exchange for a free stable OS and routing tools, they have to give back any modifications. Their alternatives are to develop their own OS at a very high cost, or pay money for an OS from a proprietary vendor.
This is completely aside from people who do it for purely philosophical reasons.
In all cases, the rest of us get to have it for free by the very nature of the model.
No, it does not. Value is value independent of any of the mental machinations of the creator of it.
That is the only philosophical consideration on the matter.
If a person chooses to forsake his claim on the value he creates, that is his business. Most likely they are being compensated by some other channel or even passing a hat which is honorable enough.
None of the highmindedness that seems to have swept the land with the information revolution has repealed the eternal law that there is no free lunch.
The question is whether the EULAs are enforceable. My explanation:
What gives them the power to even have a EULA? Why can't you just take their software at will? The answer is, of course, copyright.
But what is copyright? You have no inherent exclusive right to your creative works. No, you don't. It's not real property. It's ideas put on paper or into code. It's completely different from real property -- you don't own it by default.
But in order to promote the creation of those works the Constitution authorized the granting of certain exclusive rights to authors. The logic was that this gives them a chance to make some money, which should encourage them to produce more, thus raising the level of the "arts and sciences" in America. The granting of this exclusivity is purely for reasons of advancing the arts and sciences. The money to be made is only a means to this end.
So, basically, a copyright holder has no more rights concerning his works than are granted to him by law, as guided by precedent. First Sale is firmly established in copyright law. A purchaser of a copy of a copyrighted work has the right to resell that copy as he wishes. Therefore, a copyright holder does not have the power to restrict the resale of his copyrighted works.
To put it in real property terms, imagine you leased some property, and that lease came with an easement on a road to the property behind you. You simply do not have the right have those on the road arrested for trespassing. That easement is a limit to the rights granted to you by the lease.
Not really tools for the same purpose. You'd have to compare Designer to SolidWorks. Plus SolidWorks, while a decent program, is FAR too GUI-fied. AutoCAD's command line and LISP customization blows SolidWorks away on 2D work like electrical schematics.
But shame on Ebay for listening to Autodesk. If I sell something to someone and he subsequently tries to sell it on Ebay, would they listen to me if I told them to take down the auction? Of course not, nor should they. So, it means they’re caving to Autodesk “just in case”, and selling out their customer (the seller), the party with whom they actually HAVE a contractual relationship. Disgusting.
Too bad. You bought it, they shouldn't be able to prevent you from selling it, unless they're willing to guarantee to buy it back at full price. Right of first sale. EULA's basically say "You have no rights. We have all rights. Common sense be damned. If you don't like it refer to rule number one." It's too one sided to be enforceable.
The value of Linux has been estimated in the billions of dollars, yet it is free. Of course, Linux wouldn't have that value had people not given their time and expertise for free. But then if not for giving that time and expertise, those people would not have Linux either.
If a person chooses to forsake his claim on the value he creates, that is his business.
Good that we agree. Although most don't forsake the claim. The works are still copyrighted. They are just given away for free.
Most likely they are being compensated by some other channel or even passing a hat which is honorable enough.
There are many compensation methods, in actual valuable considerations and in the intangibles.
None of the highmindedness that seems to have swept the land with the information revolution has repealed the eternal law that there is no free lunch.
Most in the business don't think there is a free lunch. Considerations are paid in various forms. IBM has invested millions in Linux development, and all their work is given away for free. But they get Linux for free too. Payment in code rather than in cash.
There are also people who do it as a hobby. The challenge and fun is their payment, plus they get to build a reputation. "I wrote the mpeg-4 decoder for VLC" looks pretty good on a resume.
The Handbrake I mentioned is basically some people who together want the best DVD ripper possible. The open and free method the initial developer chose gave him a far better product than he could have written for himself. The people who contributed didn't have to start from scratch in order to get the best DVD ripper out there. Everybody's compensated, just not in cash.
Whatever way they get their payment in the manner they wish, the system works, and it produces some good software. Just think of the people in the neighborhood getting together to clean up the local park. Nobody gets paid, but they're all happy with the result.
Autodesk is one of the worst companies to deal with when it comes to their products, especially Autocad.
I bought a seat of 3D Studio Max at an auction once, they told me that I would have to pay a licensing fee to use it when I contacted them with a question on it because the serial number was already listed from the previous owners. Not a friendly company, I called back and used the name of the previous company and they answered it.
Is there any rational way to earn a living by giving software away??
Free software is all around you.
I get a lot of goodwill value out of giving away my older software.
Incorrect. The cost of digital duplication and distribution of electrons approaches zero.
Now take into account consumer/producer surplus and viola, free lunch is served:
To Hell with the Copyright Cartel!
They've leeched off our culture and economy long enough.
Disney shouldn't be able to bribe Congress into extending copyrights to 99 years, or infinity minus one day.
Mickey Mouse, etc should have been set free into the public domain long ago!
I hope eBay and autoDesk lose their shirts after the seller wins his case.
I agree the command line is superior for 2D work. That’s why I keep the Intellicad clone, and also used Autcad LT on my last job for schematics and interconnect panels. But their full-blown design software is terrible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.