Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Oct 2009 19:04 UTC
Legal Yesterday morning, we ran an item on the Autodesk case, but we (as in: me) got all confused about what exactly was going on. As it turns out, I was right from the start; despite my update to the item, the case was not resolved. The link in the update referred to an earlier stage of the legal ramblings. However, we now have a real conclusion in this case - and once again, Autodesk lost: software is sold, not licensed. Note: Thanks to Brian W. Carver from Cyberlaw Cases for clearing everything up via email. Much appreciated!
Thread beginning with comment 387363
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
bizarre thing...
by bsdero on Fri 2nd Oct 2009 12:39 UTC
Member since:

anyway, who did invent that "license" for product selling??

Imagine me trying to get a license from VW, just to drive my car... "You can not sell cars, because we are selling u the license, not the car!!!". That mean if I need to drive the car of my gf I must have a license to drive her car too??

Reply Score: 2

RE: bizarre thing...
by achmafooma on Sat 3rd Oct 2009 01:31 in reply to "bizarre thing..."
achmafooma Member since:

I don't know who invented it, but it goes back before software. My parents have an antique Edison Co. phonograph machine and, I kid you not, it has a little patent notice plastered on the side of it.

It says something to the effect of, "By purchasing or otherwise obtaining this machine you acknowledge the validity and enforceability of all patents of the Edison Company."

I was blown away...a hundred year old piece of hardware with an EULA.

Reply Parent Score: 1