Too bad Sonimus!

[kmonkey]

I never understand why developers are such crybabies about second hand license or whatever you want to call it.

It is clear actually and simple.

You/seller goddammit when selling something you are exhausting your income or money or whatever you want to call it in THE FIRST SALE. Buyer then have it. After that he can do with it whatever the f*** he want. Sell it for peanuts or for golden bar whatever.

You can fragment or twist this as old as world itself - sale practice - but no....you want to tie your buyer to your product and you want to limit it. Haha. So glad of EU on about this one.

You sell your product, you exhausted your plan. Then after that do your job and innovate as a company don't blame second hand market if your company is going bad.

I never seen U-he or NI or Relab or normal companies with top quality (sand expensive) products - limiting in some shady way their user base.

Sonimus imo does have top notch products. However they decided to sell it for candy. Oh ok (i call it a bad decision) then but they then even limit their second hand options by

a- not replying to customers for license transfers
b- making products limited after first sale (do they turn to NFR or something)

Whatever the f*** second hand user is actually limited by their obscure and bad marketing decision which is - i am going to sell my product as being underpriced.


Sonimus - good (amazing actually) products with bad running business behind the curtain. That is my perception.

[dzilizzi]

Software must be the only time that the original seller wants a cut of the second-hand sale. Imagine Ford insisting on a 15% fee when you buy a second-hand car...

It has been said many times, that with software you're not buying a product, but the license to use it. So you're basically selling a second hand license.

It's not that easy. When you buy a software license for perpetual use, you own the license (not the product itself of course). And you, and only YOU own the license. It's your propriety, the software seller really has no rights left over this specific license, it's really yours. And you can resell it anytime, without any fee.

If you are from the EU or the seller is from the EU in particular, these practices are straight invalid (and extremely shady!). I'm also aware of more than one case were US software companies had to open gates for license transfer (for perpetual licenses), but don't know the details.

Consequences

This decision does not mean only that software developers cannot prevent second hand sales of their software by their European licensees. It means software licence agreements and all their terms and conditions (not just the one prohibiting transfer) can be ignored by European courts if the licence period is indefinite, and probably even if it is tied to the lengthy period of copyright ­­­in Europe - 70 years after death of last surviving programmer. Such a licence will be regarded as a simple sale and sales of personal property cannot be tagged with conditions on how the property can be used.

This means, for example, that if a licence for software to be downloaded has an indefinite or long period then the usual restrictions or obligations placed on a licensee as a condition for granting the licence such as number of servers, server location, confidentiality, security, field of use, termination for breach will all be unenforceable.

Quoted from from here: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail. ... 8afd8b3380


https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120 ... cant.shtml

Makes me wonder if all the annual licenses we are seeing so much of now are because of this. It definitely gives the user a beginning and ending date.

[bungle]

Like I said, you will be seeing the end of the word buy.