Sawyer Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 http://cyberlawcases.com/2009/10/01/court-rules-again-that-vernor-can-sell-autodesk-software/ "The judge further states the Vernor is indeed the owner of the copies of the AutoCAD software he was selling on eBay. The judge obviously reiterated that while Autodesk owns the copyright to AutoCAD, Vernor owns the copies. The judge also addressed some of the concerns raised by Autodesk about what would happen if Autodesk lost. "Autodesk's suggestion that consumers will be harmed by rising retail prices if software producers compensate for the resale market does not address the concomitant price benefit in the form of reduced resale prices," the judge writes, "Although Autodesk would no doubt prefer that consumers' money reaches its pockets, that preference is not a basis for policy." Autodesk also claimed that Vernor's actions constitute piracy. The judge found this claim "unconvincing". "Mr. Vernor's sales of AutoCAD packages promote piracy no more so than Autodesk's sales of the same packages," the judge states, "Piracy depends on the number of people willing to engage in piracy, and a pirate is presumably just as happy to unlawfully duplicate software purchased directly from Autodesk as he is to copy software purchased from a reseller like Mr. Vernor." Autodesk can still appeal the case, but with yet another slam-dunk loss in court, it might just be that they're going to give up. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Okay, so, any lawyers here? Does this mean that we can now have a market for used copies of software in general, and perhaps (am I just dreaming here?) the first bit of precedent that will lead to the end of the monopolish practices of licensing only one or two resellers per region? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieLeon Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Hmmm....does this mean that all the architecture firms that downsized can now re-sell all the Autodesk software that they are not using? If so, I think the market will get flooded with very cheap copies of things that we don't really need. Not a good day for Autodesk.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sawyer Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 I dont know but it seems HUGE! Or could be huge. I imagine it will be appealed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Burden III Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 it might just be that they're going to give up. Uh, sure. Autodesk accepting this without further litigation. What I don't get is what would be the situation if in fact we OWN our copies of software (would this apply to downloaded versions--there are no physical objects like CDs). Fine, so I can sell you my copy of Poser on CD. But to use it, you would still have to have clear license to it, wouldn't you? I don't see anything in this news that answers whether a software publisher would be required to honor a software license transfer. NextLimit refused to allow any of their customers to transfer a license, even for free, as I recall. I do not know if that is still their policy, but if not, anyone want to buy a small pile of Maxwell 1 licenses--hardly used! I would love to hear about forced license transfers upon software sales as a matter of law not publisher's discretion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe some publishers DO allow license transfers. I think Adobe, AutoDeSys and Maxon - all my faves do. I do believe there are fees involved, but relatively minor. I've always been a fan of FormZ hardware key. I have my software installed on all my Macs and PCs and just move the key as required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyC Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 I cant imagine this is the end of this story. As far as I know, Autodesk has one of the best legal teams in software today. A general ruling would put their future business strategy in jeopardy. They could easily throw a lot of time and money at an appeal. Interesting times! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SandmanNinja Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 I was taking some classes in 3d modelling YEARS ago and we used Lightwave. I bought full copies (not student copies) of Lightwave and when the course was over, I contacted the Lightwave people and they said that it was fine to resell. I sold it with-in days of listing it. I wasn't into 3D in a big way back then and had never purchased a program that cost that much before, but I was glad to be able to get most of my money back. I think it's a reasonable choice to make. I guess what clouds that decision today is the number of people making cracks for software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkletzien Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 loses, but we know what you mean. Autodesk is masterful at asking for a lot of money for not so much. In light of this, I can't imagine plan A isn't...OK, thanks for your call, the cost to transfer a license is 3,500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devin Johnston Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 What about those people on subscription, from what I understand you only legally own the original copy you purchased before you went on said subscription and you're only leasing the software from that point on. I hope this knocks Autodesk down a few pegs, but they are most definitely going to appeal that ruling with all the money we send them every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Warner Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 What about those people on subscription, from what I understand you only legally own the original copy you purchased before you went on said subscription and you're only leasing the software from that point on. I hope this knocks Autodesk down a few pegs, but they are most definitely going to appeal that ruling with all the money we send them every year. We're on subscription here, but still use an older version of the software. Our reseller told us that if we drop subscription, we're able to use only the most current version of the software legally, and would not be able to use earlier versions. Because of this, we continued our subscription plan, but may not next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 Now that is a very impressive bit of licensing. If I buy 2010 with subscription, then in a couple years I cancel my subscription I am required to upgrade the computers to 2012... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inxa Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 This is big, isn't it. Has Autodesk said anything about this on their website or anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Homeless Guy Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 If you are a Vray user, I don't see a lot of advantage in using anything past version 9 at this point. Even with the new tools and interface that Autodesk has introduced. That is 9, not 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devin Johnston Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 We've decided not to use 2010 (even though were on subscription) and stick with 2009, I can't see any reason to upgrade and I hate the new interface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianKitts Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 (edited) As a Vray user it took me a bit to realize the benefits.....but I'd have to disagree and say that jumping to 2010 was worth it and not to be skipped. The graphite modeling tools in 2010 are great for polymodeling. If you haven't played with xView when cleaning up imported meshes from foreign sources, I highly recommend it. And for cleanup the quadify modifier is great even if it only works well half the time. I'm not sure if we had vertex painting before 2010 but that's where I picked it up, painting straight on to your textures is great. I use it all the time for large sites in the roadways. You can set a base color then just paint in a separate darker asphalt to add detail throughout. And with the Connection Extension release it gets even better...... Native sketchup file import, stellar on my end, I know that a few have had problems with it but I'm yet to run in to one. We have a lot of sketchup users in our firm on the design development end, importing their garbage models used to be a hassle. Exporting to multichannel EXR's without having to use the VRIMG output dialog is great, because now it allows you to setup the batch render dialog. You have to disable the vray frame buffer which means losing some of your exposure controls and the history buffer..... but you can use it for development then drop it for production. The new user interface is here to stay.... might as well get used to it, and to be honest, now.... I like it. I fully agree the updates between v9 (2007) - v2009 added nothing! But this one's worth checking out, specially if you're on subscription. Edited October 6, 2009 by BrianKitts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devin Johnston Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 We do very little modeling and our models come strait out of ArchiCAD and don't need cleaning up. 2009 does let you paint on vertexes but I have only used it once or twice, we don't use sketchup, EXR's or batch rendering so like I said it wouldn't really benefit us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyC Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Did I miss something? This was reported over a year ago! http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/05/court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-right-to-sell-used-software.ars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Yes, this is the second time Autodesk has lost this case. If they want to try again they'll have to appeal it to the 9th circuit, where they'll likely lose. (The 9th circuit includes California so they get most of the tech cases, which is good because they're also considered the most liberal circuit court and they tend to come down on the consumer side more than some of the others.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyC Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 We've decided not to use 2010 (even though were on subscription) and stick with 2009, I can't see any reason to upgrade and I hate the new interface. I must admit if they dont take out that silly application menu from 2010 I'm going back. Not sure whats going on at Autodesk at the moment but ACAD is just a mess now, a little bit of that mess leaked into Max. Grrrr! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Homeless Guy Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/first-sale-doctrine/ Just incase anyone missed it, Auodesk has now one this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-MerlyN- Posted September 11, 2010 Share Posted September 11, 2010 hm, will be interesting to see, what the san francisco appeal court says next... I wonder, when there will be a final descision... Anyway, if this descision stands right in the end, I think Autodesk should implement a "return-licence-option", so, that if you dont need a certain software anymore, you can return it to autodesk and get some money back, or even better no more purchasing, but only subscription. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Homeless Guy Posted September 11, 2010 Share Posted September 11, 2010 Autodesk is at the center of the battle, but for the most part, this court case is representative of the majority of software across the board. Look at the companies that supported and pushed for the decision..... Google, Adobe, Oracle, etc... It is much more lucrative to license than it is to sell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now