View Single Post
Old 09-04-2014, 02:59 PM   #38
Sil_liS
Wizard
Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Sil_liS ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
Quote:
Originally Posted by mandy314 View Post
@beachwanderer
Thank you for the information and the links.

For those who want to have a closer look at the court decision discussed and some central principles of law (immaterial goods) involved:

Ruling of OLG Hamm 15. Mai 2014 · Az. 22 U 60/13 (German)
http://openjur.de/u/692344.html
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erschöpfungsgrundsatz

Most of it is way above my head. One line of argument for validating the clause prohibiting re-selling seems to be that the ebook "owner" must copy the book to sell it (like sending it via email to the buyer and AFTER THAT deleting the own file). Copying the content is illegal, so re-selling can't be possible . The court sees the Terms Of Use clause even as consumer-friendly it prohibiting to do something which would be illegal.

... Oh, come on ...
The ebook "owner" must copy the ebook to read it, it can't be illegal.
Sil_liS is offline   Reply With Quote