Article View: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt
Article #216Re: ** Windows for Workgroups 3.11 for $34.00!!!! ***
From: Richard Molpus
Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 00:00
Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 00:00
103 lines
5720 bytes
5720 bytes
On Sun, 05 May 1996 12:51:52 -0700, Carl Steinhilber <csteinhilber@graphicmedia.com> wrote: >NOYDB wrote: >: lcs@jumpnet.com (Lindsay Computer Systems) wrote: >: >: > 2. Even if these WFW packages are true MS OEM product, the legal ramifications >: > of MS Licensing are that unless ALL sellers have OEM Distribution Agreements >: > with Microsoft, all product becomes illegal, and even brokering those packages, >: > without ever even touching, or seeing those packages, subjects all parties to >: > the army of MS lawyers, etc., etc., etc. > >: Courts have already ruled on these issues. > >They HAVE?!? Which courts?? WHERE?!? > >: This statement is not true. MS would like for you to think this but the law says >: that I may sell any property I own, period. > >Therein lies your confusion. You don't OWN the software. It is >LICENSED to you. What you pay for when you buy a piece of >software is the media on which it is distributed. The >developer/marketer/manufacturer still owns the software which >resides on that media. > >Thus, if you wish to format all 544(x 8) WfW disks and sell >them in lots of 8 for $34, that's your legal right. But you >can not sell the software. > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Carl Steinhilber csteinhilber@graphicmedia.com >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Carl: Before you start talking about what is and isn't law, please tak a course in Business (commercial) law at your local college. I did - and got surprised at what REALLY goes on in the legal system. perhaps the most important point that my instructor made to us was "The LAW is what the JUDGE decides, not what the legislature has printed up." The Court system (U.S. and State) have decided time and time again that once an item is put up for sale, and sold, in "the Ordinary Course of Commerce" the Item passes free and clear, without any restraints, between the seller and the purchaser. Microsoft can Mumble and Froth about how EVERYONE in the chain between their warehouse and Joe Blow, Naive User, must be part of a contractual agreement, but place that in front of a Judge and Microsoft will Lose,lose,lose. Remember "Shrink-Wrap" Licences? Where opening the box bound you half-a-different way to Sunday with obligations? When that hit the Judges Bench, the Judge ruled against the agreement - anf the company that tried to enforce it, so fast it hurt the plantiff's attorneys. The only real thing that Microsoft can do is to discover where those copies came from, then try and punish who sold them in th first place - and even then Microsoft can't do much, unless it wants to get hit with a Lawsuit claiming that Microsoft is "engaged in restraint of trade" (trying to create a monopoly). So, to whoever is trying to sell the W4W sets, best of luck - and give me a cal, I might want to by a few sets! Richard Molpus (817) 446-3682 Oh, by the way, a court case that addresses this issue? Check: Independent News Co. v. Williams 293 F.2d 510 (3rd Cir. 1961) Independent was the Plantiff, Williams the Defendent Case was in Pennsylvania Williams won. The judge ruled that when an item is sold in the normal course of trade, it becomes the property of the buyers, and may be used/sold by the buyer as is seen fit. In this current case, Microsoft is (in your eyes) able to deny someone the right to sell a Microsoft product, because Microsoft insist that it eternally retains ownership of the item. Because of the "Licence" that Microsoft grants to you, they then can insist that they can stop you from passing the item onward as they see fit. The Independent News case addressed that point - and shot it down in technicolor flames. go read the Case if you doubt my words. It is commonly included in most business Law textbooks. In addition, the courts have refused to support most (not all) of the "Licences" that software companies splash on their products. I'll leave it up to you to discover WHY the courts have ruled those "Licences" invalid. Richard Garrett Molpus | "He can't even run his own life R.M. Assembly | --- I'll be dam'd if he'll run mine." "Legal profit our Aim." |
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<318ed514.40078113@news.why.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<4lm4r0$ld@ecuador.it.earthlink.net> <4lquuo$ee4@news.jump.net> <4m4t7c$bvi@tiger.avana.net> <318D06D8.700B@graphicmedia.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 113580,9d11baf094cbac4d X-Google-Attributes: gid113580,public X-Google-Thread: 10afa1,9d11baf094cbac4d X-Google-Attributes: gid10afa1,public X-Google-Thread: 102b3b,9d11baf094cbac4d X-Google-Attributes: gid102b3b,public X-Google-Thread: f70d1,9d11baf094cbac4d X-Google-Attributes: gidf70d1,public X-Google-Thread: 11431d,9d11baf094cbac4d X-Google-Attributes: gid11431d,public X-Google-Thread: 111310,9d11baf094cbac4d X-Google-Attributes: gid111310,public X-Google-Thread: fd817,9d11baf094cbac4d X-Google-Attributes: gidfd817,public X-Google-Thread: 111bbe,1b109a6fc2c53c0a X-Google-Attributes: gid111bbe,public From: flute486@why.net (Richard Molpus) Subject: Re: ** Windows for Workgroups 3.11 for $34.00!!!! *** Date: 1996/05/07 Message-ID: <318ed514.40078113@news.why.net> X-Deja-AN: 153439884 references: <4lm4r0$ld@ecuador.it.earthlink.net> <4lquuo$ee4@news.jump.net> <4m4t7c$bvi@tiger.avana.net> <318D06D8.700B@graphicmedia.com> organization: Why? Network (817) 795-1765 newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.lang.borland-delphi,alt.comp.shareware,alt.comp.shareware.programmer,alt.comp.tandem-users,alt.computer.consultants,alt.computer.consultants.ads,aus.ads.forsale.computers,aus.computers,aus.computers.cdrom,aus.computers.ibm-pc,aus.computers.linux,aus.computers.logic-prog,aus.computers.os2