3 ms·

This is not a great distinction because there are government imposed limits to the vendor imposed limitations, even if it is a "license". FSD will hold up with

by verall 7y ago

This is not a great distinction because there are government imposed limits to the vendor imposed limitations, even if it is a "license". FSD will hold up with physical DVDs in American court, even if the vendor says they only sold you a non-resellable license to view the DVD. Court isn't going to care the vendor called it a license. The distinction is the jurisprudence regarding the medium, with a dash of vendor license agreement. Also how you purchased it and what a consumer would "reasonable expect" will probably come into play: if you buy 1M old DVD with license to not resell that you and vendor have physically signed, your FSD is less likely to hold up than if you bought one DVD at Walmart with an EULA.

gamblor956 7y ago
FSD will hold up with physical DVDs in American court, even if the vendor says they only sold you a non-resellable license to view the DVD. Right, because that's literally how the FSD was written. The sale of a DVD of "X" necessarily includes a license to view "X". The license is subordinate to the DVD (beause it is necessary for use of the purchased good), and because the FSD applies to the DVD, it also necessarily applies to the subordinate license. if you buy 1M old DVD with license to not resell that you and vendor have physically signed, your FSD is less likely to hold up than if you bought one DVD at Walmart with an EULA. No, the FSD still applies. You've just described Redbox, which actually fought and won this battle (about reselling used DVDs). It would be different if you bought a DVD that included a license for an online streaming version of the movie that couldn't be resold. Redbox fought and lost this battle against Disney. In a nutshell: Redbox can do whatever it wants with the physical copy of the movie, but the FSD doesn't apply to the streaming license that was bundled with the DVD and so they couldn't sell those separately from the DVDs themselves.
- verall 7y ago
  Yes, and I appreciate you refererencing the specific cases, because my main point, is that that is what matters. It is the jurisprudence that defines what limitations are allowed. Vendors will constantly claim "licenses" and "limitations" that are not supported by jurisprudence and would not likely hold up in court.

by verall 7y ago

gamblor956 7y ago

FSD will hold up with physical DVDs in American court, even if the vendor says they only sold you a non-resellable license to view the DVD. Right, because that's literally how the FSD was written. The sale of a DVD of "X" necessarily includes a license to view "X". The license is subordinate to the DVD (beause it is necessary for use of the purchased good), and because the FSD applies to the DVD, it also necessarily applies to the subordinate license. if you buy 1M old DVD with license to not resell that you and vendor have physically signed, your FSD is less likely to hold up than if you bought one DVD at Walmart with an EULA. No, the FSD still applies. You've just described Redbox, which actually fought and won this battle (about reselling used DVDs). It would be different if you bought a DVD that included a license for an online streaming version of the movie that couldn't be resold. Redbox fought and lost this battle against Disney. In a nutshell: Redbox can do whatever it wants with the physical copy of the movie, but the FSD doesn't apply to the streaming license that was bundled with the DVD and so they couldn't sell those separately from the DVDs themselves.

verall 7y ago
Yes, and I appreciate you refererencing the specific cases, because my main point, is that that is what matters. It is the jurisprudence that defines what limitations are allowed. Vendors will constantly claim "licenses" and "limitations" that are not supported by jurisprudence and would not likely hold up in court.