| |||||||||||||
The grumpy editor's e-book readerThe grumpy editor's e-book readerPosted Jul 25, 2009 16:37 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)In reply to: The grumpy editor's e-book reader by dlang Parent article: The grumpy editor's e-book reader
I know that courts have struck down such rulings in the past for software purchases that the vendor tried to claim were only licenses to use. They have also upheld such agreements. It is possible to use software without owning a copy of it. Even if the copy you're using is in your house. And the Echostar case was even simpler, because it didn't involve any mind-twisting new intellectual property law; it was about ownership of hardware. Echostar disabled a box, which the contract said belonged to Echostar, though it was on the customer's property. That's been going on for hundreds of years, though it used to require a person to go to where the box was to disable it, rather than reach in through radio waves.
as for weasel words in the contract, In a contract, "weasel words" are not terms that withold something one of the parties would like to have (or feels entitled to), such as control of a DVR. They're words that reduce the effect of an otherwise simple term, sometimes to nothing. For example, "DirectTV shall provide television service 24 hours per day, where practical." "Where practical" are weasel words. They're called that because one of the parties narrowly escapes an (otherwise) obligation, like a weasel can escape a predator's grip.
(Log in to post comments)
The grumpy editor's e-book reader Posted Jul 25, 2009 20:09 UTC (Sat) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
yes it's possible to use software without purchasing it. I am not disputing that
but the question that the courts have asked in the cases I have noticed is if the acquisition of the software was structured as a purchase or not.
and from what I've seen, if the user pays a lump-sum up front for the software it's considered a purchase
the fact that you can sell your kindle on e-bay would also indicate that you purchased it.
in the case of a DVR, what happens when you cancel service with the satellite company? if you keep it (which is what I've always seen happen) it's a purchase, not a rental
The grumpy editor's e-book reader Posted Jul 25, 2009 23:06 UTC (Sat) by jordanb (guest, #45668) [Link]
I think you should go back and read your customer service 'agreement' very carefully. It may surprise you.
Also, try checking out that FAQ question I posted.
At any rate, even if you continue to insist that they don't claim ownership of the receiver you have, they *clearly* and *separately* claim ownership of the DVR software, and they also reserve the right to change the software at any time (again, read your customer service agreement).
So DirectTV setup the legal framework to be ordered to disable their customer's DVRs, in an effort to retain far more centralized control than they'd have in a clear-cut transfer of ownership situation.
|
|||||||||||||