Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 30th Sep 2009 16:09 UTC
A very simple question for you. How often have you resold software that you legally purchased? Often enough, right? Well, if it's up to Autodesk, the company behind AutoCAD, you will no longer be allowed to resell your software. Update: As it turns out, the matter has already been resolved: Autodesk lost. A win for all of us.
Thread beginning with comment 387089
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Deja vu all over again?
by tomcat on Wed 30th Sep 2009 19:43
in reply to "RE[2]: Deja vu all over again?"
Member since:2006-01-06
He doesn't have to.
The fact that the judge narrowly scoped his decision is a reason why people have very little faith in the judicial system to solve real problems.
First your scenario is not the situation he had to decide on and second the scenario includes an illegal act on behalf of User A, i.e. this has already been taken care of by law.
It's not "taken care of by the law". When was the last time you heard about prosecution of illegal use of software?
RE[4]: Deja vu all over again?
by anda_skoa on Wed 30th Sep 2009 20:03
in reply to "RE[3]: Deja vu all over again?"
Member since:2005-07-07
The fact that the judge narrowly scoped his decision is a reason why people have very little faith in the judicial system to solve real problems.
I am not sure I understand what you mean.
The job of a judge is to decide the case at hand, not some hypothetical case.
It's not "taken care of by the law".
This might of course depend on the country. It is definitely taken care of by law here in Austria.
When was the last time you heard about prosecution of illegal use of software?
Well, I haven't heard about anyone being prosecuted for illegaly using a re-sold house by means of backup keys either, but this doesn't imply that it is in accordance with local laws.
You have to be aware of that somebody else is using your property without your consent in order to bring it to the attention of the authorities.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-07
He doesn't have to.
First your scenario is not the situation he had to decide on and second the scenario includes an illegal act on behalf of User A, i.e. this has already been taken care of by law.