I think he should have the right to sell it. I would allow folks to sell my systems.
I don't really care what "copyright law" says. I don't care what the "license agreement" says. Code is no different in my eyes from any other product.
You can sell your Ford Explorer, and they can't force you to agree to a license saying you won't resell it... But you still can't make copies of it and sell it... Even though you have never agreed to any such provision.
Why should data be any different in this regard? Why should I be prevented BOTH from selling my copy, and any copies I make? Because I could more EASILY make a copy and keep the original for myself? That's silly.
Are we going to stop people from selling used cars when we get nanobots that can make an exact copy in a few days with some inexpensive scrap metal, because once they buy a car they could protentially make a copy and keep it for themselves?
It is illegal to make copies of intellectual property. That is enough.
Moving data from one machine to another does not constitute making a copy if the original copy is erased.
And you know what? We're not even talking about a copyright violation here. He's not making a copy. We're talking about a license agreement violation. And did Snary even make anyone agree to a license before they used the software that says he can't transfer the license to someone else? That's the real question here.
The only argument that one can't transfer a copyrighted game or movie to someone else is if there is something in the license agreement says he can't. Otherwise it is legal to do.
So before people continue arguing here about whether he's right or wrong for selling him copy, how about someone find the license agreement he agreed to when he bought it, if there is one? At least then we'll know if he's violated the license, becuase he certainly isn't violating copyright.
And then we can argue about whether or not that license should be enforceable.
I don't really care what "copyright law" says. I don't care what the "license agreement" says. Code is no different in my eyes from any other product.
You can sell your Ford Explorer, and they can't force you to agree to a license saying you won't resell it... But you still can't make copies of it and sell it... Even though you have never agreed to any such provision.
Why should data be any different in this regard? Why should I be prevented BOTH from selling my copy, and any copies I make? Because I could more EASILY make a copy and keep the original for myself? That's silly.
Are we going to stop people from selling used cars when we get nanobots that can make an exact copy in a few days with some inexpensive scrap metal, because once they buy a car they could protentially make a copy and keep it for themselves?
It is illegal to make copies of intellectual property. That is enough.
Moving data from one machine to another does not constitute making a copy if the original copy is erased.
And you know what? We're not even talking about a copyright violation here. He's not making a copy. We're talking about a license agreement violation. And did Snary even make anyone agree to a license before they used the software that says he can't transfer the license to someone else? That's the real question here.
The only argument that one can't transfer a copyrighted game or movie to someone else is if there is something in the license agreement says he can't. Otherwise it is legal to do.
So before people continue arguing here about whether he's right or wrong for selling him copy, how about someone find the license agreement he agreed to when he bought it, if there is one? At least then we'll know if he's violated the license, becuase he certainly isn't violating copyright.
And then we can argue about whether or not that license should be enforceable.