Chris/Mods need a ruling on:

09-17-04, 01:16 AM

Software sales.

Classified Forum rules say:
"No software sales unless it is a retail product that has never been opened. (Opened software dips into a grey area that we do not need to go into)"

I found the above information while looking for this thread:
http://www.aximsite.com/boards/showthread.php?t=50211&highlight=software

I started selling software AFTER seeing that thread and no mods saying it was against the rules.

There have been a few completed sales in the classified forums by other members with mods changing it to 'sold'.

I've changed all my software sales to pending until we can get a ruling.

mikop · 09-17-04, 01:33 AM

Yes, the clarification would be welcomed.
Certainly I agree with the policy as it does leads to a gray area of software licensing, but like you, I too took the plunge to after seeing couple of software sales going through.

**Chris Leckness** · 09-17-04, 01:34 AM

We have been talking about starting to enforce this lately in the Admin Room...

There are several issues that arise from the sale of previously used software. The one that concerns me and I am unsure if any legal ramifications could arise from it if a developer suspected a problem is.... (long sentance).... Hypotheticly, I could buy software for my Axe... Install and then sell the license as if I were removing the program. Well, Instead, I decide to just log the serials and sell it off. So now, I have a free program and the buyer owns the TRUE rights to the software.

I am not accusing ANYONE of this, but allowing it to continue could lead down more unsavory roads later...

I am adding a poll to get the an idea how others feel about the issue. I am not totally leaving the descision to the vote, but I want some others views. Developers chime in as well...

mikop · 09-17-04, 01:58 AM

I think you should NOT allow software sale.
as you say,
1. issue of legality of software licensing and the liability.
2. difficulty in enforcing any soft of "maybe if..." scenario.
Whatever you do, it just need to be consistent.

I purchased the software I am trying to get rid of on 7/3, bought the replacement on 7/24 and have been sitting on it for that long so its not an issue to me whether I can get rid of it or not, free or otherwise

And frankly, software is cheap. Takes many software sales to equal the $ amount of one hardware sale. Too much effort/trouble for too little gain.

MrKlaatu · 09-17-04, 02:15 AM

Originally Posted by Chris

Hypotheticly, I could buy software for my Axe... Install and then sell the license as if I were removing the program. Well, Instead, I decide to just log the serials and sell it off. So now, I have a free program and the buyer owns the TRUE rights to the software.

I vote no, because of the possibility (likelyhood) of what Chris mentions and how it could adversely affect AximSite and Chris, personally.
.
.
.
.

09-17-04, 02:24 AM

I think it's theft only IF the seller does not remove ALL iterations of the software from both PC and PPC.

Well, it's also theft if you sell it more than once ;)

Yes, impossible to enforce.

If you buy a used CD at a garage sale, you don't know if they burned a copy for themselves before selling it.

Is it my responsibility to ensure they are being honest, or is it theirs?

frankenbike · 09-17-04, 02:45 AM

One of the reasons I prefer Freeware whenever I can get it, is because 80% of the software I have ever bought turned out not to function the way I wanted it to.

I've been grilling people on mapping software, trying to find out if it will meet my needs in actual practice. Until I install it and ride across several states, I really have no idea how well it works. Unless I can borrow someone else's similarly configured Axim and GPS and see how it works. Not much of a chance of that.

So should I be stuck with the price of the software, at nearly $100 per map program? When people purchase software, if it doesn't work for them, should the have to eat the price of the software?

What about trialware? Well, what if a situation where it doesn't meet your needs doesn't arrive before the trial is over?

I really have a problem with the one way street nature of purchased software. I think the developers don't give enough information about how their product really works or the limitations.

It's true, Aximsite has no way of knowing if someone is honest and has uninstalled the software. But if the rule is established that it's what is supposed to be done before selling software, the responsibility should be that of the user selling the software. Assuming that everyone is dishonest because some are dishonest is unfair. A lot of software really doesn't perform as advertised, and if someone else wants to give it a try at a discounted price, that's fair.

AFAIK, no developer offers a complete refund if not satisfied for an extended period of time. A lot of trialware is handicapped, so users can't really honestly tell how well the full version will work.

The fact that I have four freeware mp3 players, none of which do everything I'm looking for, tells me that actually paying for one would be throwing out my money if I found that one didn't do what I expected, because I'm gambling that buying it makes it the one I want.

What the proposed policy tells us is that indeed, buying software is like buying a lottery ticket. If you don't win, you just wasted your money.

09-17-04, 03:03 AM

a paradigm shift needs to take place.

I can go to my local video store and sell them my unwanted DVD. I can go to my local music store and sell them my unwanted CD. I can go to my local video game store and sell them my unwanted video game.

Because the paradigm is I gave them a tangible, something they can hold so the assumption is I no longer have it.

which is an incorrect assumption, if the person is dishonest.

frankenbike · 09-17-04, 03:40 AM

The problem with something like "downloadware", where you download software and if you buy, you get a serial key so you can use it, is that there is no tangible good.

As a distribution method, this is great for the software publisher. There's no physical product that needs to be manufactured, packaged or moved, no shipping necessary...nothing. You just worry about writing the software, and getting people to download it.

From the buyer perspective, you don't have a physical anything. The only thing you bought is a reg. key.

For the convenience of cheap distribution and no packaging costs, the developer's only problem is that someone can sell that key and keep the software themselves. That's the risk.

It seems to me, then, that there is a risk imbalance. If the person buying the software is prohibited from reselling the software at a slight loss, the buyer assumes all the risk that the product will meet their needs.

The CD/DVD paradigm is a good comparison. It assumes that the seller is honest and hasn't made a duplicate.

Here, the assumption seems to be that the seller is inherently dishonest and has made a duplicate.

HardOnReset · 09-17-04, 03:44 AM

This a tough one!

Would the creator of the intellectual property want their ‘creation’ spread far and wide, as long as they’re paid – probably yes?

Would the distributor/owner want their ‘property’ spread far and wide, probably not – this implies reduced market size, loss of control and potentially increased distribution costs.

As for the ‘punter’, I don’t think they think much further than their next ‘purchase’.

My view is, does it really matter if you ‘distribute’ .1 million at $10 a piece versus 1000 million at $.001, excluding distribution costs.

We have a serious conflict here!

One way I see it working is by ‘charging’ the shop - POS (often ISP) that provides the product.

HardOnReset :approve:

Edited: A while later, my views are perhaps inappropriate in the scheme of survival. This thread is about 'policy', I with others headed into the land of 'if'!

mikop · 09-17-04, 04:16 AM

retracted since this isn't about right or wrong, but simple

NO, this issue is too much of a pain in the butt and unless you have top notch lawyers on retainer chris, avoid it like the plaque!

MrKlaatu · 09-17-04, 04:48 AM

.
.
I'd just like to slip this in, real quick:

This Thread isn't about the "Big Picture".......it's about the "AximSite" Picture and whether or not Chris should risk some "RIAA-like" Entity coming down on him for allowing the Re-Sale of Software on this Site.

Putting the Site at risk, not to mention his own person, as well.

I have retracted the previous statements I made that helped veer this Thread away from Chris' intentions.
.
.
.
.

reese · 09-17-04, 09:29 AM

Ebay allows it, Aximsite should too!

09-17-04, 10:07 AM

Then how about redirecting software sales to Ebay?

09-17-04, 10:26 AM

Unopened software is quite different and should continue. Opened or downloadable, in my opione and speaking just for this site's potential risk, should not be allowed. It only takes one lawsuit or court challange to bring any site to its knees in defending itself. Only my 2 cents worth.