Skip to main content

Business > News

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 Autodesk suit could affect secondary software sales

A dispute over secondhand sales of Autocad continues

Nancy Gohring

  • Email to a friend
  • Print this article
  • Bookmark this page
  • RSS feed

A judge Tuesday heard arguments in a dispute over software sales that could potentially have repercussions on the secondhand sale of virtually any copyright material.

The suit was filed by Timothy Vernor, a seller on eBay, after Autodesk, citing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, asked eBay to remove some of its software products that Vernor had listed for sale there, and later to ban him from the site.

Vernor had not illegally copied the software but was selling legitimate CDs of the products secondhand. For that reason, he argued, he was not infringing Autodesk's copyright.

Autodesk countered that because it licenses the software, rather than selling it outright, a licensee does not have the right to resell its products.

"The deal between Autodesk and the licensee is [that] you pay us for the software and you're not going to be able to sell it on the used market," Michael Jacobs, an attorney with Morrison and Foersters who is representing Autodesk, said in court on Tuesday.

If the court sides with Vernor, the fundamental economics of Autodesk's business will be upset, he said.

While Jacobs acknowledged that this isn't a case where software was illegally copied, he argued that the end result is similar. That's because the original owner of the software can continue to use the software while the original CD is resold to someone else, without Autodesk profiting from the second sale.

In fact, Vernor originally bought the software from someone else, so Autodesk also argued that Vernor had unlawfully acquired it, because the software license did not give the original owner the right to sell it to him.

Vernor's lawyer responded that while Autodesk can call it a licensing arrangement in which it retains title to the software, in reality it is selling a product that an end-user then owns.

"There's no way for Autodesk to control the software once it's in the stream of commerce. The particular copy of software gets full value up front. Autodesk doesn't ask for periodic payments," said Greg Beck, a lawyer from the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen who is representing Vernor.

He drew a parallel with copyright books. Most books include the line "all rights reserved" in the front. That means someone who buys the book can't make copies of it or read it as a dramatic performance to a crowd. "That's different from saying you don't own the copy of the book you purchased. You do own it because you have the right to keep it or destroy it or burn it or do whatever you want to that copy, even though you don't have the greater rights," he said. By the same token, someone who buys a piece of software has the right to resell the software CD, he said.

If the person who sold the software to Vernor keeps a copy of it, in violation of the agreement with Autodesk, that doesn't make Vernor responsible for infringement, he argued. "That's the case with any copyrighted material. You never know for sure when you buy a book if the person [who sold it to you] has made a copy," Beck said. "You have no way of knowing."

Indeed, Beck has argued that the case could have wider ramifications for consumers. "If copyright owners could restrict resale of their products with these so-called agreements, used book and record stores would soon disappear," he said in a statement when Vernor's case was filed.

The two-hour hearing, in the US District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle, was in response to motions for summary judgment filed by both sides. The judge can now rule for Vernor or for Autodesk or send the case to trial.

Beck expects the judge to rule for one party or the other, and for the loser to appeal. Early last year the judge declined a request by Autodesk to dismiss the case.

While Jacobs said the software industry is watching the case closely, few companies have commented on it publicly. Microsoft, the Software and Information Industry Association and the Washington Technology Industry Alliance did not reply to requests for comment.

Check out our new Macworld Mobile site.

Follow Macworld UK on twitter: www.twitter.com/macworlduk

Email A Friend

Email this article to a friend or colleague:



PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the recipient know who sent the story, and in case of transmission error. Both your name and the recipient's name and address will not be used for any other purpose.

<<prev article | back to news index | next article>>

Question of the day!

Mark Hattersley
Editor in Chief

Do you share your creations online?

Question of the day!

Do you share your creations online?

% of Macworld readers agree with you

Yes
TBC
No
TBC

What do you create and how do you share it?

124 characters remaining

Follow the conversation at @TabletChat

paintings & illustrations, mostly, which i upload to flickr.RT @fragmentedm

I draw manga/anime characters. I also do graphic design and photography.RT @spialelo

Yes. I usually put them up on my #deviantart account for feedback on how to improve.RT @spialelo

Comments received


R5SB said on Wed, 30 Sep 2009

@Autodesk. If you only want to rent or lease your products you should make this clear in you T&Cs and reduce your prices accordingly! When I rent a car or a dvd I don't expect to sell it on and this is reflected in the price I pay upfront.

Dragonfly said on Wed, 30 Sep 2009

I bought a legitimate licensed UK version of Inventor on ebay last year, but ended up having to return it, as Autodesk didn't allow license transfers. :-(

When you buy a book, are you buying the physical book or the story enclosed ? An author could sell one book and that could be read and resold 100 times to 100 different people with no additional money going to the Author. In a way that's not right. I can also see that if an engineering company went bust and 100 Autocad licenses ended up at car boot sales for £200 each, then Autodesk would struggle to sell their new software for £6,000.

On the other hand, surely you can resell something that cost £6000 if you no longer have a use for it.

Kevin said on Wed, 30 Sep 2009

The just want to make as much money as possible. You know that car and house you bought, hope you read the fine print, you don't own them you licensed them! They are yours to keep as long as you want till you die if you want them no extra cost but no sorry you can't sell them or give them away!!!

Badger said on Wed, 30 Sep 2009

So why don't they just stop the software being registered to a key more than once??

Dragonfly said on Thu, 01 Oct 2009

Apparently Mr Vernor won the case.

arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/05/court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-right-to-sell-used-software.ars

Disclaimer
Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not reflect those of Macworld. Macworld accepts no responsibility legal or otherwise for their accuracy of content.
Click here to read the house rules.

Click here for the latest reader comments

Latest News


More news...