View Single Post
Old 07-14-2009, 11:00 AM   #233
Shaggy
Wizard
Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Shaggy's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,293
Karma: 529619
Join Date: May 2007
Device: iRex iLiad, DR800SG
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harmon View Post
All of that is true, but the legal principle which applies is that when you buy something, you can only acquire the property rights that the seller has to sell.

The seller of infringing property by definition does not have any ownership rights in the property. The copyright laws place the ownership in the copyright owner as long as we are within the copyright period. So the seller can't sell you what he doesn't have, no matter that you paid him for it.

Obama can't sell you my car. You can pay him for it if you want, but it matters not. It's still my car, not yours.

This is not really debatable as a legal matter. It's fundamental to property law.
Laws and analogies for physical products don't apply. Copyright and IP laws are fundamentally different. This has nothing to do with property rights.
Shaggy is offline   Reply With Quote