Yep...

Ooh...how wrong you are.

Last I saw none of my CDs had a little slip of paper included that stated...don't worry, laddie...if you go all klutzy and misplace or damage this CD you bought...you can get another one free whenever you like.

You PAID legally for the single 'copy' of the music/content via the medium of a compact disk.  You DID NOT also pay for further 'copies' via an alternate distribution method, legal or otherwise.

It's like dropping your hamburger in the dirt....you're fucked...you don't get another one....unless you buy it again.

ROFL classic.

I wonder what Joe Sixpack's reaction would be if he found squatters living in that second house. Using someone else's property without their permission, what's wrong with that?

Could be a good one. If the second house was made with design not paid for - by definition it is - then does sixpack own the house legally?

If he doesnt, how can he bring a case to eject the squatters from a house he doesnt legally own?

Potentially a wonderful catch 22 - especially if they survive in there long enough to own it by default

Frankly, I have no idea, just curious if there is a real legal beagle around on the forum.

Regards
Zy

There sure are a lot of misunderstandings in this thread.

The EULA for software typically conveys a right to the purchaser to use the software. The physical media, the CD, the packaging materials and so forth become the property of the purchaser and thus can be re-sold.

This has always been the traditional definition of something legally becoming my property, I can later sell it if I want even though the original seller might suffer a theoretical income loss. Used cars are a big business as is used car parts. The used car market turns out to be the friend of the auto industry making car loans easier and the purchasers decision to buy a new car easier as well.

That's why the EULA does not transfer to me a property interest in a "copy" of the software. Given the state of techonlogy I could then make copies and sell them. Just think if there were Star Trek style replicators, Porches would be plentiful.

Whether or not a used software product is resellabe has been generally held to be legal and EULA's have been worked to limit this activity as well in the form of language granting a single "non-transferable" right to use the copy of software.

A related item that may be of interest are the basics of contract law. A sale is a contract. It's usually documented with the transfer of possession of an item in exchange for money accompanied by a receipt. Generaly, a contract is considered valid if there is a genuine meeting of the minds between the two parties and, consideration (something of value) must be exchanged between the two parties.

The software industry makes staying within standard contract law nearly impossible. First, by hiding the terms of the EULA from the purchaser until after the sale. Second, since I can not possibly know what I've agreed to with the purchase of the software until after I get it home and open it and read it I can't agree there was any willingness on my part during the sale process to agree with what I would have to live with. If I am unhappy with the license terms I can no longer return it because I opened the packaging.

What happens if it won't work with my hardware? Have you tried to read the obscure micro print on these software packages? You need a magnifying glass. Even magnifying(2.0+) reading glasses are insufficient. In short they make the buying decision difficult. Furthermore, many of the measures claimed by the industry as needed to thwart "piracy" are really anti-competitive in their nature.

A valid used software market would alleviate many computer software issues. Of course this would require a change in stance from the industry that somehow even my use of the software remains more the seller's property than mine. It's as if the software industry wants to rent me the use of the software while charging me a purchase price for it.

Finally to this idea that new laws are needed to punish "pirates" I have to ask why? We have proven methods in place including arrest and trials. Judges have latitude in sentencing and are already known to escalate punishments for more serious offenses. I think what is happening here is the industry is attempting to transfer the costs and burdens of protecting their products to the taxpayers and the legal system.

It also can not address the source of the problem because they are typically out of jurisdiction. Hence much of these efforts come across to me as an attempt to harshly punish the local denizens who nibble on these sort of illicit fruits because they're here, while those who are making such things possible remain beyond reach.

The best solutions for such problems are carrots. Like the Stardock model. Buy version 1.0, to get updates and enhancements you need to be registered and activated. This won't prevent "cracked" piracy but, it will tend to stimulate interest in the full version.

Every retailer has problems with shoplifters. How much to spend preventing theft is the issue. The legal system is only willing to absorb so much cost in prosecuting these types of offenses. The legal system should keep the burden of protecting software products on the software companies where it belongs.

end of my 2+ cents.

The whole thing collapses right there, the rest is irrelevant.

You are not purchasing, there is no such thing as the "purchaser", you are the licensee, you are given a licence to use the software - end of story.

This "purchase" nonsense is a myth.

Want to use software - pay the copyright holder - period.

Regards
Zy

No. As stated later, I did indeed not purchase the product. I merely license it under an EULA. The EULA says as long as I pay my license fee, I am free to use the software on a single PC. Therefore, since it's not a final end-user sale, and I don't buy the media, but the information on it, why can't I insist on my licensed right to re-use the software? They did grant it, and now they took it away because it's linked to a physical item (the DVD). So if the DVD is replaced (which I will cover the cost for), we resume the license we already agreed to.

If it was a physical sale, instead of a license, I would agree with you, yes, then it's my problem.

OK, another scenario, then. I buy Sins from a retailer, and receive a license key. I register this with Impulse and receive updates. Then I lose my disks. I download a torrent of sins, or copy a friend's DVD, then install it on my own PC using my original license key (I always keep copies of such). Is this considered theft/piracy? What does Stardock feel about it officially?

Pretty much sounds like you are claiming purchasing - it is however irrelevant.

They licence the right for you to use the software, not resell it. You cant sell something you dont own, it does not become your property.

Another urban myth.

Want software - pay the copyright holder.

Regards
Zy

Not a clue - ask Stardock.

Regards
Zy

In the time of the great dollar bill...
The internet is the great equalizer.

Why would you do that? You can download the whole thing from Impulse after registering anyway. There's no point in wasting time with torrents.

If I were them (as I am most emphatically NOT) I would be dismayed by that. Not that you downloaded the game, but that you did not use the shiny new Impulse system designed to do this!

edit: dang, kryo beat me to it  ( 

I think it's a bold idea. I'd probably expand it to protect all IP that's violated, mostly through the torrents. The question is how reliable is their evidence collecting systems? And what's to protect some physically-disabled telecommuter from being falsely accused? Will one misclick make that person unemployable for a full year?

How large is Sins? I pay R70/GB (close to $10) for data on my ADSL line. If Sins is large enough I will spend more than the purchase price to get a copy from Impulse. Especially if I have to do it multiple times. Cheaper to copy a DVD (maybe R2-R5).

I am seriously considering burning backup images with Impulse anyway.

South Africa - the only place it may actually be cheaper to buy the original than to pirate it

Eagerly anticipating my copy of Sins. I played the demo and liked it, so I will likely enjoy the retail one too. Should be here in the next 10 days.