Quote:
|
Originally Posted by US District Court in Seattle, ruled:
Autodesk...has ignored the terms of the License itself. The Autodesk License is expressly “nontransferable.” … Autodesk does not explain how a nontransferable license can bind subsequent transferees.”
|
That's interesting. Read that one way and it says that a re-sold software product becomes free of the EULA if the EULA declares itself non-transferable. I'm sure Autodesk and Microsoft can argue their way out of that one. How, will also be interesting.
I don't think anyone is thinking its
right to be able to terminate someone else's ownership rights in IP by transferring a product to someone else. But if some of these EULAs have gone beyond reasonable and legally-defensible terms, perhaps that is the unintended consequence of an over-reaching legal document.
Courtrooms are just gambling halls without the free drinks. You can't predict what will happen. Or happen next round. This is Federal District Court--I think there's one level above, Appellate Court, before the top level, Supreme Court. An appeal sounds likely.