Software Licensing and Sanity (was Re: Moving from SCO to SuseLinux)

[Bill Vermillion]

On Sat, Jul 31 02:55 , Jay R. Ashworth gie sprachen "Vyizdur zomen 
emororz izaziz zander izorziz", and continued with: 

> On Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 06:17:20PM -0400, Fairlight wrote:
>
> > Only Kenneth Brody would say something like:
> >
> > > I think the courts have already decided that you must be
> > > able to read the license agreement prior to opening it, or
> > > else be allowed to return it after opening it. (ie: you
> > > can't be bound to the terms of an agreement that you cannot
> > > see until after agreeing to it.)

> > That's good at least. It's spreading to more industries, too.
> > I read of a medical text publsher that gave a complimentary
                                                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > copy of their latest work to some doctor, and they had a
^^^^^^^^^
> > shrinkwrap license inside the book that basically wouldn't
> > let you give it to anyone, nor could you use it for 'x'
> > purposes, nor could you return it, nor could you dispose of
> > it. It basically became a white elephant of a paperweight.

> Not actionable. Books, like computer software, records and
> CD's, are subject to a thing (in the US) called the First Sale
> Doctrine.

Since this was a 'complimentary copy' - and the recipient did not
buy the book - the person/company who sent that book could legally
place restrictions upon it.  

To me this could also fit along the lines of an NDA.  

I'm assuming the doctor had to at least request that complimentary
copy.

However >IF< that company sent the copy un-requested AND they
shipped it by mail I've always heard that things like that are
yours to do with what you wish.


-- 
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com