Watchdog To Represent eBay Seller In Autodesk Suit

New10k writes "Following up on a recent Slashdot discussion, nonprofit consumer advocacy group Public Citizen has agreed to provide an attorney to eBay seller Timothy S. Vernor, who is suing Autodesk in federal court over misuse of the DMCA to stifle competition. The advocacy group has identified elements of the Vernor case as some of its key litigation priorities for 2007. The article includes an interview with Vernor's new lawyer, Greg Beck, who was a software engineer for Microsoft before going to law school."

Sorry for OT

But ...

"The article includes an interview with Vernor's new lawyer, Greg Beck, who was a software engineer for Microsoft before going to law school."

I don't know what to think of that. Does working for MS tell you that there's more money and better job security in the IT field in the legal department than in development?

Re:Sorry for OT

Why would you make that assumption from a single person's decision? He obviously felt he would like being a lawyer better for whatever reason. You don't know the reason, and don't have any clue what it could be.

People change jobs and careers all the time and to paint everyone with the same brush because of 1 person's decision is lunacy.

Re:

Why would you make that assumption from a single person's decision? He obviously felt he would like being a lawyer better for whatever reason. You don't know the reason, and don't have any clue what it could be.

Well, we know it wasn't for ethical reasons...

Re:

Says who? Just because it would be horribly worrying doesn't mean it's impossible.

Autodesk? Suit?

I've never heard of this case before, running through the article I guess the problem is Autodesk doesn't want him to sell used software packages of their software AutoCAD.

The bastards, I would say! It's like trying to prevent selling used music CDs or used books. How long will we have to cope with companies 'selling' us stuff when they mean 'lending'. Either they let us SIGN a contract BEFORE we buy explaining how they want to deliver their product (lend it, lease it), or if they don't do that, we can consider it BOUGHT and our property. You can not in retrospect claim someone didn't buy (gain ownership) to the product if you didn't make that completely clear beforehand. They ask enough money for the product to make it sure look like you have the right to own it and do what you want with it.

Re:

Quite true, and everyone involved in the transaction except Autodesk is pretty certain it's a sale. I bet even Autodesk do at some point.

Customer to shop: "I'd like to buy a copy of AutoCAD" Shop to Customer: "Sure. There's your copy. That will be $79

Re:Autodesk? Suit?

Yes, I just checked the autocad shop [autodesk.com] and nowhere it mentions that you will buy a license. Instead you spend about 4000 dollars on something for which it mentions "Reasons to Buy" (so not Reasons to license). Nowhere on the page it gives us any buying conditions. (or did I miss them?)

Additionally they have a subscription service [autodesk.com] with a different pricing scheme [autodesk.com]. Autocad there is about 400 dollar I guess, it doesn't mention on what timespan, a year probably.

All this data on their own website points in one direction: for 4000 dollars you buy the software package after which you own that copy of the software package, to do what you want with it. For a subscription price you can buy a subscription where you don't own the software but it makes sure that during your subscription they 'lend' you the most recent software.

Re:

Actually, under "Licensing, Registration, and Activation", Autodesk makes it very clear that you are not purchasing software, you are purchasing a license to use software. They also make it clear that this license is not universally transferable.

The licens

Re:

Hmm thanks, I didn't find that one, since I wasn't looking at 'services & support'. From the site:

An individual stand-alone license entitles the purchaser to run an Autodesk® product on a single workstation. Its an ideal solution for individual

Re:

...are used exclusively by the same person...

So its per machine *and* per concurrent seat *and* named individual licensed? Reading that I would assume that if I buy one copy of AutoDesk and have two part time architects use it on the same machine (At different times of course) that I am violating the license.

I hope I am totally wrong, and I doubt that anyone will shy from pointing that out in the most direct fashion.

Re:

Actually, you can get all the way to the checkout page with only one minor reference to a license at the bottom of the page:

"Software Products and services
sold from this online store are only licensed for use within US and Canada. Training materials, boo

Re:

sorry, I meant to bold "sold" also.

Re:

You are confused. Autodesk is actually protecting the potential eBay consumer. If I bought a copy of AutoCAD on eBAY, I'd be very disappointed to learn that it wouldn't install without authentication and I'd be very, very disappointed to learn that I cann

ethics

Ethically, the seller shouldn't sell something that they know is worthless. It may be that eBay doesn't hold sellers accountable unless a buyer complains, but that isn't right. Furthermore, eBay has no real way of enforcing ethical behavior after the fact.

Re:

When a company is playing the 'you didn't buy, you leased' shell game, that strikes me as an ideal place for open-source alternatives to step up to the plate. I'm aware of some that are under development, but when I was looking for a CAD program a few mon

Re:

I think qcad is working now (sudo apt-get install qcad on ubuntu), but I make no promises as to its capability or functionality. I played with it for like 3 minutes once.

Re:

Actually, the pricing scheme is a bit more evil than what you just described....

In "the good old days" (I've worked with AutoCAD since about '86) you bought the product, and had support for it; when a new release came out you could upgrade for the differen

Re:

Qt license runs for $6600 and Trolltech also does not provide the terms of the license on their website. Not sure, but I think they'll provide them if you want prior to purchasing (ie. licensing) the software. Also, the commercial license prevents you from

Re:

Hint: There is no such thing as 'legal' second-hand Autodesk software. They have the most draconian license agreement in existence. Of course, they have the market share to make customers eat it, and as long as the customer makes money they won't care too

Re:

Hint: There is no such thing as 'legal' second-hand Autodesk software. They have the most draconian license agreement in existence.

Hint #2: There is such a thing as legal second-hand Autodesk software, because their draconian license agreement is bunk, as

Re:

There is no such thing as 'legal' second-hand Autodesk software.

disclaimer IANAL

The license may not extend beyond the first purchaser (that's a contractual agreement assuming everything is done correctly in the license) but the license very likely does no

Re:

You can not in retrospect claim someone didn't buy (gain ownership) to the product if you didn't make that completely clear beforehand.

"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further." - Darth Vader and, apparently, the Copyright Empire.

Th

Re:Autodesk? Suit?

Not just once, you could start your own CD printing factory and sell million of copies.

This isn't how copyright law works. You can sell a copyrighted piece of work that you bought (such as a book) but only the original copy you originally bought (i.e. You can't start your own printing press and sell the book).

Re:

Actually it is well known that you can license or contract on top of copyright to prevent people from reselling a copyrighted work that they have paid for. Courts are kinda wishy washy on EULAs but I believe a majority of them hold them up. You can contrac

Re:

Well, there is the copy that you bought in the first place... Perhaps there are certain rights you do or don't have regarding THAT copy as well.

Numpty or troll?

If you "owned" a piece of software, you could resell it. Not just once, you could start your own CD printing factory and sell million of copies.

Distribution of the copy you own is completely different to making & selling multiple copies. What you said

Re:

You only get to see the contract AFTER buying. Someone should test how legal this can be. There are things I won't own but pay for it, say my DSL connection. I do get to read and are asked to read the contract before I buy it. I am ok with that because I c

Re:

If you "owned" a piece of software, you could resell it. Not just once, you could start your own CD printing factory and sell million of copies.

That's what ownership means.

No, that's what being the copyright holder means. Owning a box, manual and CD/DVD me

Re:

For some reason you seem to believe that you can't resell a license. Why not?
And for some reason you seem to believe that you can't sell some property that comes with a license.
What happens if the shop that bought AutoCAD burns down? What do they claim fro

Re:

" For some reason you seem to believe that you can't resell a license. Why not? "

Look at domain names. You never own one. When you grt right down to it you're licensing them. And you sure can resell them.

eBay's the guilty party here

Autodesk was probably just sending DMCA's for any eBay ad that sounded like warez being offered.

They could have done a bit more to research this propperly, as the DMCA assumes, but the real problem here is that eBay just ignores any complaints about blatantly obvious (and provable) warez offered on their service without having to resort to legal measures.

Their own Vero service which is supposed to help in this department is a total sham; I've never even gotten response or noticed any actions being taken despite sending clear evidence that warez were being offered.

To me, the guilty party is eBay, for not taking any responsibiliy in upholding their own anti-warez policy. The only way to get eBay to stop being a warez middleman is by sending out DMCA's and with the sheer amount of warez on eBay, it was only a matter of time before this would happen.

I'm not saying Autodesk is innocent here; technically, they should have done the research. Just saying that none of this would have happened if eBay just did what their policy claims.

Re:eBay's the guilty party here

Autodesk was probably just sending DMCA's for any eBay ad that sounded like warez being offered.

Even in that case, Autodesk is in the wrong. The DMCA requires them to declare that they "a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials [...] is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law." To have such a belief, I'd say they need to do more research than just bulk sending takedown notices without checking if there's anything to imply the belief. "Good faith" requires them to make reasonable efforts here.

Re:

eBay just doesn't want to police itself for some reason. Maybe they are so pro-seller that they don't want to get involved. I reported pretty obvious fraud a few times and they did nothing.

In one case someone hijacked a seller's account with positive feedb

Re:

I'm not saying Autodesk is innocent here; technically, they should have done the research.

"Technically?!" Are you not aware that Autodesk's lawyer perjured himself by sending a fraudulent DMCA notice? That's a felony, you know! Unfortunately, the odds are

Not Relevant

As you mention yourself, DMCA (improperly) assumes that the copyright holder has done their homework. It is not eBay's fault if they issue improper DMCA notices, even if eBay is negligent as you say. Those are two different issues. eBay might be lax on the

About Time

That's about all I have to say. About time. Cheers.

I'm starting to get what they say about ebayers...

Watchdog To Represent eBay Seller In Autodesk Suit

I guess I'm starting to get why they say ebayers are stupid. I mean really, would you let a watchdog represent YOU in a suit?

Great choice of ads, slashdot!

Check the ad appearing next to this article: http://samwyse.googlepages.com/slashdot-autodesk.jpg [googlepages.com]

Re:

Check the ad appearing next to this article: http://samwyse.googlepages.com/slashdot-autodesk.jpg [googlepages.com]

There are ads on Slashdot? [adblockplus.org]

Re:

Yeah they are fairly unobtrusive and presumably go some way to pay for the bandwidth I consume whilst I am here,so it doesn't bother me.

And anyway, didn't you know that using adblock is both morally wrong, ethically wrong, a copyright violation, stealing

ads

There are ads on Slashdot? [adblockplus.org]

Forget about using ad blocking software, instead use a Host file [wikipedia.org]. Here's a good article on using one for Blocking Unwanted Parasites with a Hosts File [mvps.org]. Google [google.com] has some links where you can download a Hosts file, all one is is

From career at MS to lawyer???

I dunno how he did it, but apparently that guy has forfeited his soul TWICE!

Re:

I dunno how he did it, but apparently that guy has forfeited his soul TWICE!

He didn't sell or forfeit it, he licensed it with a condition which allowed him to terminate the license at will, which he did to relicense it under similar but reworded licens

The precious anti-VERO fight

Anyone seriously interested in this issue should read about the crusades of Ebay seller Tabberone, who singlehandedly defeated many corporate DMCA abusers trying to maliciously end their auctions:

http://www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/OurFight.shtml [tabberone.com]

It's a wealth of information for the self litigator. ...

~ f

Re:

" read about the crusades of Ebay seller Tabberone "

This is the coolest thing I've read in a very long time. I thought I knew a little about copyright and trademark law but had no idea that stuff produced by slave or force labour invalidates copyright.

Nice

Laws at Issue

AutoDesk used the DMCA to try to prevent a sale of their software. The DMCA is not in place to enforce breech of contract disputes - it is for copyright protection. Using the DMCA in this way constitutes fraud. They are trying to enforce part of their licensing terms that say you cannot transfer a software license. Certainly whether or not that provision is legal or enforceable if it is legal will come up at trial.

California has a law that if a company guilty of fraud and they are sued, they can be forced to transfer all profits from that fraudulent activity to the plaintiff. I believe last year that some of the teeth surrounding this law were removed partially because people were using the law to extort money from small business owners all around the state - but given the fact that AutoDesk has done the same thing to the same guy 7 times I would bet they are in a bit of trouble.

Re:

Breech of contract? Did Audodesk hire Roy Pearson as their lawyer or something?

Why is eBay subject to DMCA takedown provisions?

I asked this question the first time this case came up and got no replies. I'll ask it again.

Under what theory does the DMCA apply to eBay sellers? Unlike YouTube, eBay hosts no copyrighted materials. (For simplicity's sake, let's leave aside trivial objections like when a seller's advertisement includes a photograph of a copyrighted work.) Is the claim based on some extension of the Grokster decision, arguing that eBay somehow constitutes a "contributory infringer" if it hosts an auction for copyrighted materials? That seems to run squarely up against the first-sale doctrine. If I buy a book, there's no reason why I can't resell it on eBay.

I realize that the Autodesk case is more complicated since it brings into play issues of licensing vs. ownership, the enforceability of EULAs and the like. The only way I could see eBay being charged with contributory infringement is if they knowingly encourage the sale of illicit copies of copyrighted works. Even then, I think it's a hard case to make. In Grokster, the Court's argument rested largely on the fact that Grokster explicitly encouraged infringement by distributing its software application and hosting advertising on its website. How does that apply to eBay?

This could be the end of "physical" software...

While I'm all for this guy winning (and hopefully turning this into a class-action against Autodesk, eBay, etc.), I do wonder if this means that software manufacturers will no longer physically offer their software (i.e. CD, DVD, etc.) but will require you

Re:

Or...they could just be straight forward and tell you its a lisance! Wow, there's an idea...

Downloaded, Burned, Sent via Morse Code and Signal Fire, I dont care. If they cant be bothered to confirm its a lisance and not an actual product, they can get