Registration

CW wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  

My last post on this, then we'll have to agree to disagree. ;)
The car analogy simply doesn't work with this topic, IMO. Maybe compare it to leasing a car. Think a dealer would mind if you sold the car you leased from them? You can do it. It's certainly possible. Problem is, both the seller AND BUYER in that circumstance could find themselves in a legal predicament.
Bottom line is this: Anyone who is considering 'buying' an already registered version of AutoCad from it's original purchaser should do a bit of research and consider their decision very carefully. Their very business could be at stake. For $3K dollars, is it really worth the risk? How much would it take to defend yourself, assuming that you are legally correct?
I won't say you're right or wrong in your legal assessment. What I will say is that anyone should be very careful about this whole issue. Personally, I don't want to be the test case.

If they had you sign a lease agreeement, that would be enforceable but they don't. They sell you software and present an agreement after the fact. That is not a lease and it is not enforceable. the only leagle rits they have over that softwre is copyright.
  Quoted Text Here  

CW wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Then why would/should anyone pay for such a copy?!? If it isn't registerable, it isn't worth $0.02. JMO, of course.

What does registration do for it. Does a registered copy become more usable some how. Did you buy the clothes you're wearing? Are they registered? if not, I guess you wasted your money.
  Quoted Text Here  
it
the
have

  Quoted Text Here  
WRONG AGAIN. YOU ARE ONE STUBBORN PERSON.
TOMD IS RIGHT. YOU ARE BUYING A ***LICENSE*** TO ***USE*** THE SOFTWARE, YOU ARE NOT BUYING THE SOFTWARE TO DO WITH WHAT YOU PLEASE. IT'S AS PLAIN AS THE EULA.AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, THEN DON'T BUY FROM AUTODESK!!!!
DO YOU HAVE A LEGAL COPY OF AN AUTODESK PRODUCT? DID YOU OBTAIN IT SECONDHAND? DOES AUTODESK KNOW ABOUT IT? I DIDN'T THINK SO, BUT YOU HAVE NO PROBLEM TELLING OTHER PEOPLE TO DO IT.

Because I'm right. Yell all you want. Throw a temper tantrum. It does not change anything. You still have your head in a dark smelly spot.
  Quoted Text Here  
it
the
have

Why do people "Copy Software"? Because software houses like the rest of the world are rip off merchants!
-- TheWizard [ snipped-for-privacy@myplace.org ] email is faked to deter spammers ......................................... Vivat vox populi, via veritas vtae Sic transit gloria mundi, sic itur ad astra
: > > They talk that crap hoping you will believe it. When you buy something, : it : > > is yours. You have everything but copyright. You can give away or sell : the : > > software. Only thing you can't do is copy it. They will not (and don't : have : > > to) honer it for upgrade. : > : > : > WRONG AGAIN. YOU ARE ONE STUBBORN PERSON. : > : > TOMD IS RIGHT. YOU ARE BUYING A ***LICENSE*** TO ***USE*** THE : > SOFTWARE, YOU ARE NOT BUYING THE SOFTWARE TO DO WITH WHAT YOU PLEASE. : > IT'S AS PLAIN AS THE EULA.AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, THEN DON'T BUY : > FROM AUTODESK!!!! : > : > DO YOU HAVE A LEGAL COPY OF AN AUTODESK PRODUCT? DID YOU OBTAIN IT : > SECONDHAND? DOES AUTODESK KNOW ABOUT IT? I DIDN'T THINK SO, BUT YOU : > HAVE NO PROBLEM TELLING OTHER PEOPLE TO DO IT. : :

Horseshit. Go away you clueless twit.
  Quoted Text Here  
the

Jim Williams schrieb:
  Quoted Text Here  
He can emigrate into another country ;-). We here e.g. in Germany have other laws which would help him.
Juergen

I believe there is a precedent dealing with Adobe or Corel software that would suggest that he legally bought and can use the software. But I doubt if Adesk came bullying around it would cost him less to defend himself than to write the purchase off as a bad investment and buy new some software that would not be subject to such disagreements. And if I had this bad taste in my mouth it wouldn't be more of the same from Adesk.
Doug T
Jürgen Palme wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  

You are quite correct.
  Quoted Text Here  
would
Adesk
write the
  Quoted Text Here  
be
DILEMNA.

Jürgen Palme wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Quite right, German copyright law prohibits such restrictive licencing as practised by Autodesk. You wouldn't own the software either but you would be allowed to transfer your right to use it to another person if you have a full version (not an educational or bundled version, of course). So, in Germany, if a company goes out of business, the proprietors (or their assignee in bankruptcy) would be acting perfectly legally if they transferred their right to use the software, and Autodesk would have to honour it.
In general, it doesn't really matter what the EULA says. If the EULA violates existing laws - in this case the national copyright law - the EULA (or at least the part that violates the law) is void. It is actually illegal to impose an EULA upon users if that restricts or limits rights which the users are granted by law. Any company that does business in a specific country automatically agrees to work within the framework of the national law of that country. If they don't like it, they are free not to do business there. ;-)
I'm not familiar with UK or US copyright law, so I can't say which rights users have to challenge certain paragraphs in the EULA or if they can simply ignore certain paragraphs in the EULA that are clearly not compliant with UK or US copyright law.
I know, however, that Microsoft has been trying to impose their EULA on customers as well, and here in Germany they have been slapped on the wrist for that, too. It doesn't even matter whether you click on the "I Accept" button when you install the software; the EULA is still void and non-binding for customers. The reason is very simple: Anything that you don't sign upon purchasing the software licence is considered a unilateral subsequent modification of a legally concluded sales agreement. And such a modification is void as you never have a chance to decline it (you can only read the EULA if you open the box (i.e. the vendor won't take an open box back and refund your money if you choose NOT to accept the EULA), and you can't install the software without clicking on the "I Accept" button. So the chronological order is very important here: Only those parts of a licence agreement which are presented to the customer upon concluding a licence purchase and agreed to by the customer, either by paying the purchase price and/or signing a licence agreement become legally binding for the customer. Anything that restricts such agreements _ex post_ or modifies them to the customers disadvantage is non -binding and void. This would be the situation under German copyright law.
Maybe the OP can check whether or not such regulations also apply in his own country.
Kind regards, Olaf
Use "reply to" address for e-mail, please.

Yes as a matter of fact there is legal precedent on this very issue. Dating 11/19/01. Contact me for a copy of the court transcript at snipped-for-privacy@cox.net. Your employer will find this quite interesting, I am sure.
Guido De Angelis
Jim Williams wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  

I garantee, he won't care.
Your employer will
  Quoted Text Here  
is
printers
they
purchase
why
about
re
DILEMNA.