PDA

View Full Version : One in the eye for Autodesk



esper8
05-23-2008, 06:08 PM
Just read this and thought you guys might find it interesting

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080523-court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-right-to-sell-used-software.html

cresshead
05-23-2008, 06:20 PM
as a artist that uses 3dsmax it's quite interesting to see this....

in 2005>
one of my past college students managed to 'buy' a second hand 3dsmax3.0 and get it activated from autrodesk [discreet back then for 3dsmax sales] as the chap selling max 3.0 was taking discreet to court if they did not let him sell the app....

one thing to note now is that apps like 3dsmax do not have a hardware dongle and now use a software key...so even if autodesk allows a sale there's nothing there from them to activate that new install....small steps...heading in the right direction but they're not there yet..

we need to see a new press release along those lines..then i'd be up for buying a second hand maya for sure!

Titus
05-23-2008, 06:30 PM
I remember a studio I was working some time ago. If they wanted to buy a used Flame the had to re-buy a license form Discreet, so they had an agreement with the seller (another studio closing) and sell the Flame saying it was "a leasing", or something similar.

Hopper
05-23-2008, 06:32 PM
This one's been going on all day. :) Move to the other thread ..

http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84436

frantbk
05-24-2008, 07:24 AM
Well, even if Autodesk were to win the lawsuit. What Autodesk hasn't taken into consideration is that once they have the right to stop sales under DMCA. Then next step for the person who bought an Autodesk product would be to force Autodesk to re-purchase the software from the original owner, or person duped in an ebay sale. In other words, the law would look at it as Autodesk can't have it both ways. One it is a finite sale of product without reimbursement of a licensed product that has to be returned to the OEM.

Bog
05-26-2008, 06:23 AM
Oh come now, frantbk! Big corporations have their cake and eat it all the time - witness the ViaCom claim that writers weren't due any money from the "valueless" Internet use of their material, whilst simultaneously suing YouTube for billions of dollars for, er, Internet use of their material.

It's not about making sense, it's about having the right lawyer and the right judge to get what you want.

frantbk
05-26-2008, 06:35 AM
Oh come now, frantbk! Big corporations have their cake and eat it all the time - witness the ViaCom claim that writers weren't due any money from the "valueless" Internet use of their material, whilst simultaneously suing YouTube for billions of dollars for, er, Internet use of their material.

It's not about making sense, it's about having the right lawyer and the right judge to get what you want.

I'm sure in the UK that has more bearing on the out come a court case. Because the Judge has rule in the favor of the ebay reseller your view is a little weak. It will depend on the Appeals court. There is a conflict of two laws that have to be resolved.
also if you really read what I posted you would find that as a theory of law, if the Judge had granted Autodesk its argument then as a lease a buy back can be enforced against Autodesk. The Judge ruled against Autodesk because a lease has time limits and other special requirements. Autodesk's license does not have any such requirements, so the Judge rule against Autodesk.