Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 10th Sep 2010 23:38 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 440415
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-01-07
Autodesk has a contract - a licensing agreement with an engineering firm.
Not John Doe breaking open the shrink wrap.
R15 to be made available a steeply discounted price - on the condition that all copies of R14 are destroyed.
Sounds fair enough.
Until the copies begin appearing on E-Bay with handwritten activation codes.
Autodesk sues vendor on the grounds that he has no legal right to sell what he is selling.
That there has been no lawful transfer of title or license from A to B to C.
The three judges on the court of appeals agreed.
The victory in the district court was on a motion for summary judgment.
A motion for summary judgment means that you are asking the district judge to declare that, as a matter of law, your opponent's arguments are absolutely worthless.
But matters of law are ultimately for an appellate court to decide.