[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dvd-discuss] Interesting 1st sale-shrinkwrap-EULA-(c) infringementcase



> >
> >
> > If renting is still legal, and not a first sale, then couldn't companies
> > like adobe effectively get around this by offering their software only 
> > for
> > rent (say the sale price to rent it for a term of.. 100 years).
> >
> >
> Or in microsoft's case, two years...


right, but that's "real" rental.  It is realistically rental, and people
going for that plan will be thinking they are renting software.  With the
100 year term, I am thinking of ways the companies might try to make it a
sale for practical purposes, but a rental for legal purposes.

btw: I especially like:
(page 15)

"To the extent that the court in <u>One Stop</u> found that the
transaction at issue was in fact a license, and not a sale, this Court
simply declines to adopt this analysis.
...
The Court understands fully why licensing has many advantages for software
publishers.  However, this preference does not alter the Court's analysis
that the substance of the transaction at issue here is a sale and not a
license."



 -- noah silva