Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>> but you agreed to the license when you purchased it,

That part specifically isn't true in all of EU. There is no such thing as implicit licences at purchase time - that's why EULA and the likes of it are worth as much as toilet paper here. And in a lot of countries you can absolutely make copies of the discs you own, no legal issue at all. You usually can't show it to large audiences, but that's not because of the licence terms, but because the laws of the country prohibit it without paying a fee to the national association of artists. If I want to show a Blu-Ray I bought to a large group of people I need to pay a nominal fee to my country's national artist's association and then it's completely legal - but I don't even need to tell the distributor of the movie, or the owner of the copyright at all, that's not my problem. Same with playing music at events and such - a fee is paid to a national organisation governing this, the distributor can say whatever they want on the box but it's just irrelevant.

>>, you can't modify it and redistribute it etc

Of course you can in certain ways and formats, "fair use" is even allowed in such restrictive countries as US.



I guess ones feelings about this depends on how you define "ownership". There's obviously something different, in all countries where the concept of intellectual property exists, between say an M8 bolt and a sculpture.

You can do whatever you want with the bolt. Measuring the treads and making 3D printed copies, taking photos off it and selling those. It's yours to the fullest extent.

You can't create and sell copies of the sculpture, in some jurisdictions you can't even sell photos of the sculpture. You can't freely make a derivative work of the sculpture.

Ownership of a copy of IP is different than ownership of other things. And ownership of digital copies of IP is so very different that it's almost not a thing.


> There is no such thing as implicit licences at purchase time - that's why EULA and the likes of it are worth as much as toilet paper here.

But EULAs are not implicit, usually you have to explicitly agree to them before you can use the product?


Yes, but EU has also ruled that any post-purchase licence is not valid. At this point you already paid for the software, its use cannot be conditional on agreeing to a licence contained within. If it is for technical reasons(the software won't install without clicking agree) then the act of agreeing is meaningless in itself.


Even if you had to agree to the EULA before buying the product, it might still be invalid. There are laws in the EU limiting terms of service and similar non-negotiable pre-purchase contracts to unsurprising, expected-by-the-consumer, fair and equitable terms. Meaning that if there is a "buy" terminology used in the contract process, small-print cannot change that to "obtain a limited license", because that would be surprising and unfair.


> "fair use" is even allowed in such restrictive countries as US.

The fair use doctrine doesn't even exist in most of Europe, so I wouldn't consider the US especially restrictive.


It might not be called that, but most countries(this is difficult to generalize, as this is not unified in EU regulations) have at least some provisions for comedy/parody, reviews, previews and discussions use of otherwise copyrighted material.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: