Replies

If one reads many software agreements closely, one doesn't buy the software, but are 'leasing' its use.

Unlike buying a book or a CD that you can give away or sell at a yard sale or trade, software ownership is usually retained by the software creator.

Technically, when you upgrade, for example, you are supposed to destroy the old software. The software company retains the right to reclaim it at will.

"If one reads many software agreements closely, one doesn't buy the software, but are 'leasing' its use."

That, and everything else you have said in your post is true.

However, it is interesting to note that even the mighty Microsoft has NEVER filed suit or claimed a licensing violation against any individual. While it is true that they have gone after some businesses for violating EULA agreements by selling more than one copy of Windows98 or 2K with the same CD key, they have never gone after an individual because they know that the EULA is worthless and would lose in court.

Legally: "software ownership is usually retained by the software creator."

As a Software Engineer, anything that I create is owned by the company.

Friday, I hit them with my own personal law: I demand to become a partner in this company, or my software will never get completed!

To my absolute amazement, on Monday morning, they offered me voting stock in the company!

If one reads many software agreements closely...

On the other hand, if one does not read the agreement and does not positively signify that he enters into the agreement, then there is no agreement. The software is thereby protected by copyright law but not a EULA.

Since you paid cash in exchange for a copy of the software without entering any subsequent agreement, you may do whatever you like with your copy. As long as you do not copy, distribute or otherwise violate the copyright, the copyright holder can not touch you.

Unlike buying a book or a CD...

Why is it unlike buying a book or CD? Books and CDs have the same copyright protection as software. The video industry actually tried "EULAs" to prevent rentals and failed as the "right of first purchase" prevailed.Or, why couldn't a seller slap a EULA on a book? Imagine that when you get home and start reading your newly purchased book, somewhere between the Table of Contents and the Preface you find a page declaring that you are only leasing this book and that by reading any further you agree that this copy can only be read by you in your own home and if you do not agree you must return the book for a refund. These terms could indeed be binding if you agree before purchase, but having already purchased the book you may tear the page out and do with the book as you please, as permitted by copyright law.

The point is, there is a difference between violating a copyright and violating a license agreement. In order for the copyright holder to claim a violation of a license agreement, he must show that an agreement was reached. This is impractical unless the agreement is made before purchase.. Failing that, he only has rights designated by copyright law.