View Single Post
Old 09-30-2010, 01:08 PM   #12
starrigger
Jeffrey A. Carver
starrigger ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.starrigger ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.starrigger ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.starrigger ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.starrigger ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.starrigger ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.starrigger ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.starrigger ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.starrigger ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.starrigger ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.starrigger ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
starrigger's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,355
Karma: 1107383
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Device: Lenovo Yoga Tab Plus, Droid phone, Nook HD+
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck View Post
They are welcome to consider it a "license for use" instead of a sale--if they describe it that way before purchase, set the terms of the license in accord with the laws that define licenses, and pay authors for licensed content instead of sales.
Let me guess how people here would react if they tried that.

I suspect this will all follow the music model eventually. But I don't think you'll ever see them explicitly allowing resale when resale effectively means "selling a clone." Do you see the music industry saying, "Sure, you can resell these MP3s when you're done with them"?
starrigger is offline   Reply With Quote