4 ms·
Is a person* able to sell something while restricting how it can be used? This is before we even get into the issues of selling software vs. selling the right
by SkyBelow 2y ago
Is a person* able to sell something while restricting how it can be used? This is before we even get into the issues of selling software vs. selling the right to use a copy of the software. Things like copyright laws, IP laws, and even ownership ends up getting complicated when deciding what is just or not. I think we mostly agree you shouldn't be able to resell copies of a book if you buy a book, but selling your own specific copy of a book is fine. But why does this distinction exist? Do you really own the book if you can't resell copies of it?
*or company. Perhaps part of the answer is that sometimes we say yes for people but no for companies.
- zzo38computer 2y agoI think that copyright (and patents) is no good, and should be abolished. They should not restrict making copies of books, selling copies, and other stuff, by copyright. What you should not be allowed to do is to make an inexact copy and then sell it and then claim that the inexact copy is the same as the original, if it is not the same as the original; however, it can still be allowed if you do not make such invalid claims.
- throwaway48476 2y ago>Is a person* able to sell something while restricting how it can be used? Of course, this is the domain of contract law. Often car companies restrict how soon a desirable model can be resold and for how much. edit: And robust anti trust enforcement keeps contract terms reasonable. Contracts are limited by unconscionability and superseded by legislation but otherwise fair game.