|reply to IowaCowboy |
Re: Ownership of software and other works
I work w/ copyright in software all the time. You assertions while excellent are a little off base:
1. Software are covered under intellectual property law and copyright, which means that yes you own that license (meaning the actual method of use), and it has been proven in the courts that you can resell that license EVEN if the licensor says you can't. This falls under fair use and first-sale doctorine laws which is what they are going after next.
2. Software will also contain intellectual property which may or may not be covered by patents, and this is totally different than the copyright laws.
3. Breaking DRM or protection mechanisms on software is actually a new invention and has been protected since the beginning of time. It should not be illegal to break a lock (DRM), but to use what is behind that lock illegally that is the problem. The DMCA took what was legal since the beginning of time and made a "specific" invention illegal. So this makes an inventor a criminal to limit competition, nothing more. This is NOT a common sense law, but one meant to be anti-competitive.
4. Much of the phone's software is based upon *nix and its open source variants, so there are ZERO phones out there that do not take advantage of open source software that falls under differing licensing requirements. Now imagine AT&T putting a lock on Central Park (a public park), and then telling people that you now have to pay AT&T to go into the park and use it. Do you think that people would go for that? No, and that is EXACTLY what they are doing.
I have worked for a number of software companies, and I can tell you that I am 100% on board for people paying for what they use, but I also 100% disagree with software locks and license owners telling me what I can do with the software, because the entire fact for purchasing the software is to create a new or derivative work.