20 Aug
2015
20 Aug
'15
7:24 a.m.
I'm no lawyer but I'm pretty sure the intellectual property rights of the
documentation belong to the original manufacturer of the equipment, not
with some random guy selling Xeroxes on eBay or the Web. I suppose it's
possible there's the rare case where an individual has actually gone and
acquired the rights to the documentation but my suspicion is that 99% of
these vendors operate in a legal gray area along with Abandonware vendors
... they have no standing to dictate terms to me ... and many are
committing the worse IP violation of not just giving away the material to
which they have no rights, but SELLING it.
Sorry if I ruffled the feathers of the dealers here, or people who have
friends who are dealers ...
Daniel, where'd you get your JD?
Best,
Sean
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Paul Koning <paulkoning at comcast.net> wrote:
On Aug 19, 2015, at 3:28 PM, Sean Caron
<scaron at umich.edu> wrote:
At what point should historic preservationists be concerned with
preserving
someone else's obsolescent business model?
Selling Xerox copies and
burned
CDs ... and that's hard cash out of the
pocket of every hobbyist that
could
undoubtedly be better spent say, preserving
actual equipment, than
paying a
"vig" on documentation. I know it's
hard to make a living in the USA
these
days but I feel the suggestion is only going to
hurt consumers and delay
the inevitable anyway.
If you want to have a defensible claim that your personal property is your
own, you have to likewise respect the claims of others to theirs.
If someone sells property he owns, you have a choice: you can spend your
money to buy it, or you can elect not to spend your money and not buy it.
But you cannot argue that the seller's business is "obsolescent" and this
is a reason to justify stealing his property. Nor can you argue, in a free
market, that the selling price is a "vig" -- if you don't like the price,
offer less, find another seller, or get in the business yourself.
paul