Buying used clipart packages?
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Joined
·
695 Posts
I know that both of those companies have specific policies that no one is allowed to sell the art to another screen printer.
I have found someone selling a couple volumes of ActionArt. I was not looking to buy a couple pieces of clip art, it would be a whole volume.
So, I guess my question should have been, are there any problems with buying someones used volume of ActionArt?
Michael
So, I guess my question should have been, are there any problems with buying someones used volume of ActionArt?
Michael
Joined
·
695 Posts
Yes, to clarify, Action Illustrated has a strict clause in there books that you are not allowed to resell them to another individual. Better safe than sorry, just call Action Illustrated: 866-696-8403 and ask them if they can give you a good deal. Ask for Donny and tell him that James from Freelance Fridge sent you.
Joined
·
3,098 Posts
I'm curious if this has ever been challanged.
First sale doctrine might cover it were you could.
The first-sale doctrine is a limitation on copyright that was recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1908 (see Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus) and subsequently codified in the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 109. The doctrine allows the purchaser to transfer (i.e., sell or give away) a particular lawfully made copy of the copyrighted work without permission once it has been obtained. This means that the copyright holder's rights to control the change of ownership of a particular copy ends once that copy is sold, as long as no additional copies are made. This doctrine is also referred to as the "right of first sale," "first sale rule," or "exhaustion rule."
The first-sale doctrine as it relates to computer software is an area of legal confusion. Software publishers claim in their End User License Agreements (EULA) that their software is licensed, not sold, thus the first-sale doctrine does not apply to their works. Courts have contradicted. Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell and Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus are two related U.S. Supreme Court cases.
Washington District Court in Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc. the court followed United States v. Wise,[1] in which films distributed by a studio that were not expected to be returned were deemed sold, and ruled that Autodesk software was sold, and thus eligible for the first-sale doctrine.[2][3]
Federal district courts in California and Texas have issued decisions applying the doctrine of first sale for bundled computer software in Softman v. Adobe (2001) and Novell, Inc. v. CPU Distrib., Inc. (2000) even if the software contains an EULA prohibiting resale. In the Softman case, after purchasing bundled software (a box containing many programs that are also available individually) from Adobe Systems, Softman unbundled it and then resold the component programs. The court ruled that Softman could resell the bundled software, no matter what the EULA stipulates, because Softman had never assented to the EULA. Specifically, the ruling decreed that software purchases be treated as sales transactions, rather than explicit license agreements. In other words, the court ruled that California consumers should have the same rights they would enjoy under existing copyright legislation when buying a CD or a book.
In a more recent case involving software EULAs and first-sale rights Davidson & Associates v. Internet Gateway Inc (2004)[1], the first sale reasoning of the Softman court was challenged, with the court ruling "The first sale doctrine is only triggered by an actual sale. Accordingly, a copyright owner does not forfeit his right of distribution by entering into a licensing agreement." However, the point was moot as the court found the plaintiff's EULA, which prohibited resale, was binding on the defendants because "The defendants .. expressly consented to the terms of the EULA and Terms of Use by clicking 'I Agree' and 'Agree.'"
Food for thought
Mark
First sale doctrine might cover it were you could.
The first-sale doctrine is a limitation on copyright that was recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1908 (see Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus) and subsequently codified in the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 109. The doctrine allows the purchaser to transfer (i.e., sell or give away) a particular lawfully made copy of the copyrighted work without permission once it has been obtained. This means that the copyright holder's rights to control the change of ownership of a particular copy ends once that copy is sold, as long as no additional copies are made. This doctrine is also referred to as the "right of first sale," "first sale rule," or "exhaustion rule."
The first-sale doctrine as it relates to computer software is an area of legal confusion. Software publishers claim in their End User License Agreements (EULA) that their software is licensed, not sold, thus the first-sale doctrine does not apply to their works. Courts have contradicted. Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell and Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus are two related U.S. Supreme Court cases.
Washington District Court in Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc. the court followed United States v. Wise,[1] in which films distributed by a studio that were not expected to be returned were deemed sold, and ruled that Autodesk software was sold, and thus eligible for the first-sale doctrine.[2][3]
Federal district courts in California and Texas have issued decisions applying the doctrine of first sale for bundled computer software in Softman v. Adobe (2001) and Novell, Inc. v. CPU Distrib., Inc. (2000) even if the software contains an EULA prohibiting resale. In the Softman case, after purchasing bundled software (a box containing many programs that are also available individually) from Adobe Systems, Softman unbundled it and then resold the component programs. The court ruled that Softman could resell the bundled software, no matter what the EULA stipulates, because Softman had never assented to the EULA. Specifically, the ruling decreed that software purchases be treated as sales transactions, rather than explicit license agreements. In other words, the court ruled that California consumers should have the same rights they would enjoy under existing copyright legislation when buying a CD or a book.
In a more recent case involving software EULAs and first-sale rights Davidson & Associates v. Internet Gateway Inc (2004)[1], the first sale reasoning of the Softman court was challenged, with the court ruling "The first sale doctrine is only triggered by an actual sale. Accordingly, a copyright owner does not forfeit his right of distribution by entering into a licensing agreement." However, the point was moot as the court found the plaintiff's EULA, which prohibited resale, was binding on the defendants because "The defendants .. expressly consented to the terms of the EULA and Terms of Use by clicking 'I Agree' and 'Agree.'"
Food for thought
Mark
Joined
·
3,098 Posts
I'm curious cuz I feel if I spend several hundred dollars and when finished with it whenever that might be I should be able sell it as long as I don't make any copies or keep any, remove all the clipart from my computer(s) or keep any catalogs of the images that came with the disks.
I can see if a company does not provide support for the resold disks or upgrades or even offer discounts as they would if purchased new from the company or reseller.
Mark
I can see if a company does not provide support for the resold disks or upgrades or even offer discounts as they would if purchased new from the company or reseller.
Mark
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
