[oclug] cracked?

[Brad Barnett]

On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:29:43 -0500 (EST)
"Rod Giffin" <rod at giffinscientific.com> wrote:

> Brad Barnett said:
> > On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:23:46 -0500 (EST)
> > "Rod Giffin" <rod at giffinscientific.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Brad Barnett said:
> >> > On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 10:16:56 -0500
> >> > Dana Webber <dana at dunrobin.dyn.dhs.org> wrote:
> >> >> How can you respect a license that _nobody_ understands? The
> >latest> example is that according to a strict reading of the W XP
> >license> you can NOT control it with VNC. MS has recently released a
> >> clarification that says you can or not depending on how many XP
> >> licenses you have but maybe one license is enough or not.
> >> >>
> >> >> With Open source you do not have this problem..
> >> >
> >> > Of course you are not bound by that MS license, in this country,
> >> anyhow.
> >> >  You are merely bound by copyright law, not some obscure license
> >> that
> >> > someone attempts to force upon you after the transaction is
> >> completed.
> >>
> >> The Copyright Act recognizes licence as the standard means by which
> >> you acquire the right to do anything with a copyrighted work.  The
> >> license has to be, under the Act, signed by the copyright holder or
> >> their agent.
> >>  It does not have to be signed by the recipient to be binding.
> >>
> >
> > I don't see this anywhere in the act.  Perhaps you had better specify
> > where it is so, because I certainly don't see it.
> 
> See Section 13, para 4 which I include below.
> 
> >> So you're right that it is not a "agreement" or "contract" like it is
> >> in the USA, and there are also terms stated in most US EULA's which
> >> you don't have to abide by in Canada.  (See para 30.6  on
> >> http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/cp/cp_circ_1-e.html).  But it
> >> is still your license - the only thing you have which gives you the
> >> right to use it under the Act.
> >
> > Not at all.  The act no where specifies that you are bound by an
> > agreement after the fact.  The url you listed above just talks about
> > rentals, and I remember when it was added for rental establishments.
> 
> You misunderstood.  The link above speaks directly about your right to
> make a copy of software for backup purposes, which is normally not
> included in the rights assigned in a US style EULA.

It also speaks about backups, yes.

>  In any event, in
> Canada you are not bound by an agreement at all, there is no agreement
> required, you are bound by the Act itself.  Your license is the license
> you received from the copyright holder, and I said it doesn't have to be
> signed by you, but by the copyright holder or their agent.
> 

No, you are not bound by any license, unless you specifically agree to it
by _signing_ for it _prior_ to purchase.  The snippet below does not state
anything about _forcing_ a license onto the consumer.  It merely states
that the copyright hold may designate a license.

Again, this does not state that he can _force_ that license on someone
that does not agree to it, prior to purchase!

Furthermore, the license that is being referred to below has nothing to do
with the end user, and everything to do with a company that is selling
your works, on your behalf.

In Canada, you are bound by copyright law (which states _nothing_ about
EULAs or the like), unless you and the seller agree to something aside
from this.  Agreement does not mean "You've bought the
product, now we are going to retroactively assign a license".

Furthermore, such an agreement may not violate copyright law.


> Some relevant bits of the Act:
> Interpretations: "literary work" includes tables, computer programs, and
> compilations of literary works;
> 
> Section 13, para 4, Copyright Act (concerning ownership of copyright) :
> (4) The owner of the copyright in any work may assign the right, either
> wholly or partially, and either generally or subject to limitations
> relating to territory, medium or sector of the market or other
> limitations relating to the scope of the assignment, and either for the
> whole term of the copyright or for any other part thereof, and may grant
> any interest in the right by licence, but no assignment or grant is
> valid unless it is in writing signed by the owner of the right in
> respect of which the assignment or grant is made, or by the owner's duly
> authorized agent.
> 
> [ SNIPPED MANY PAGES ]
> 
> Computer Programs
> 
> 30.6 It is not an infringement of copyright in a computer program for a
> person who owns a copy of the computer program that is authorized by the
> owner of the copyright to
> 
> (a) make a single reproduction of the copy by adapting, modifying or
> converting the computer program or translating it into another computer
> language if the person proves that the reproduced copy is
> 
> (i) essential for the compatibility of the computer program with a
> particular computer,
> 
> (ii) solely for the person's own use, and
> 
> (iii) destroyed immediately after the person ceases to be the owner of
> the copy; or
> 
> (b) make a single reproduction for backup purposes of the copy or of a
> reproduced copy referred to in paragraph (a) if the person proves that
> the reproduction for backup purposes is destroyed immediately when the
> person ceases to be the owner of the copy of the computer program.
> 
> 1997, c. 24, s. 18.
> 
> 
> 
> Rod.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> OCLUG general discussion list
> OCLUG at lists.oclug.on.ca
> http://www.oclug.on.ca/mailman/listinfo/oclug