5 ms·

Does anyone here know what restrictions on the sale of an item are legal (at least in the U.S.)? If I agree to sell you item X given that you promise Y, what a

Does anyone here know what restrictions on the sale of an item are legal (at least in the U.S.)? If I agree to sell you item X given that you promise Y, what are the legal values of Y? For example, I can't sell you a piece of property with the restriction that you can't sell it to a racial minority in the future. Can I sell you a car with the restriction you are not allowed to look at or tamper with the engine? Note that I'm not asking whether or not it is good/moral to ask for these restrictions. But what is in fact legal.

alex_c 16y ago
Not a lawyer, nor do I follow this particularly closely, but - I suspect Sony is framing this as an issue of intellectual property and licensing. The DMCA wouldn't be involved otherwise.
Joakal 16y ago
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/First-sale_doctrine https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/First-sale_do...
- te_platt 16y ago
  Thanks. That covers some aspects of what I am asking but not the core. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Restrictive_covenant https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Restrictive_c... covers restrictive covenants on real estate and covers the case of racial segregation that I knew about. Still not quite what I was looking for.
eli 16y ago
You're not allowed to restrict the resale of a house based on race because that specifically violates various laws. But it's common to sell a house with restrictions that apply to you and to all future buyers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictive_covenant http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictive_covenant
emmett 16y ago
There are lots of random rules about contracts. For example, terms can be struck for Unconscionability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability - which is pretty arbitrary. The article on EULAs is also interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_license_agreement#Enforceability_of_EULAs_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_license_agreement#Enfo...
- joe_the_user 16y ago
  And the rules are both random and logical in a perverse way. For example, the terms of a commercial lease can much more exploitative than of a residential lease because a commercial leaser is expected to be more savy about such things. For example, you can have terms with fine print that allows the landlord to evict tennent without cause AND demand a substantial payment at any time.
wtallis 16y ago
I think it's more a question of what kind of restrictions you can put in place without an actual signed contract between the seller and the buyer. Generally speaking, it is harder to enforce non-negotiable contracts of adhesion (ie. most contracts attached to a retail sale) and shrink-wrap contracts/EULAs, but there is currently a lot of uncertainty about it (see Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc.), and that uncertainty will probably only be resolved by a major ruling from the Supreme Court or an act of Congress.
husein10 16y ago
the restrictions on the sale of an item depend on the type of item that is being sold and any residual rights that you may retain over that item. as far as i can tell there is no way to analogize between racially restrictive covenants in real estate contracts and the rights to assert certain ip rights over a product that is already sold on its way to downstream consumers. when you come across a problem that involves this type of intellectual property issue, ask yourself which type(s) of intellectual property are in question (copyrights, patent, trademark etc). Then, try to figure out what rights an owner of that type of intellectual property has over the item. Also, you'll have to think about which country's laws apply also because copyright owners' rights are very different in diff countries, ie France vs. the US. That's a rough type of analysis that you can do to get a feel for the issue.
chris11 16y ago
I don't know what restrictions a seller can have on a sale, but I do know that some products cannot be sold to people who will use them illegally. For instance, in some places shop owners can get arrested for selling tobacco pipes to people who announce they plan on using them for weed.

alex_c 16y ago

Not a lawyer, nor do I follow this particularly closely, but - I suspect Sony is framing this as an issue of intellectual property and licensing. The DMCA wouldn't be involved otherwise.

Joakal 16y ago

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/First-sale_doctrine https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/First-sale_do...

te_platt 16y ago
Thanks. That covers some aspects of what I am asking but not the core. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Restrictive_covenant https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Restrictive_c... covers restrictive covenants on real estate and covers the case of racial segregation that I knew about. Still not quite what I was looking for.

eli 16y ago

You're not allowed to restrict the resale of a house based on race because that specifically violates various laws. But it's common to sell a house with restrictions that apply to you and to all future buyers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictive_covenant http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictive_covenant

emmett 16y ago

There are lots of random rules about contracts. For example, terms can be struck for Unconscionability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability - which is pretty arbitrary. The article on EULAs is also interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_license_agreement#Enforceability_of_EULAs_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_license_agreement#Enfo...

joe_the_user 16y ago
And the rules are both random and logical in a perverse way. For example, the terms of a commercial lease can much more exploitative than of a residential lease because a commercial leaser is expected to be more savy about such things. For example, you can have terms with fine print that allows the landlord to evict tennent without cause AND demand a substantial payment at any time.

wtallis 16y ago

I think it's more a question of what kind of restrictions you can put in place without an actual signed contract between the seller and the buyer. Generally speaking, it is harder to enforce non-negotiable contracts of adhesion (ie. most contracts attached to a retail sale) and shrink-wrap contracts/EULAs, but there is currently a lot of uncertainty about it (see Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc.), and that uncertainty will probably only be resolved by a major ruling from the Supreme Court or an act of Congress.

husein10 16y ago

the restrictions on the sale of an item depend on the type of item that is being sold and any residual rights that you may retain over that item. as far as i can tell there is no way to analogize between racially restrictive covenants in real estate contracts and the rights to assert certain ip rights over a product that is already sold on its way to downstream consumers. when you come across a problem that involves this type of intellectual property issue, ask yourself which type(s) of intellectual property are in question (copyrights, patent, trademark etc). Then, try to figure out what rights an owner of that type of intellectual property has over the item. Also, you'll have to think about which country's laws apply also because copyright owners' rights are very different in diff countries, ie France vs. the US. That's a rough type of analysis that you can do to get a feel for the issue.

chris11 16y ago

I don't know what restrictions a seller can have on a sale, but I do know that some products cannot be sold to people who will use them illegally. For instance, in some places shop owners can get arrested for selling tobacco pipes to people who announce they plan on using them for weed.