EXS 24 Logic Sampler Users Group

>- I've long felt that it's wrong for a license to forbid you from 
>reselling the library. If a developer wants to charge a registration 
>transfer fee for support and updates, fine, but you should be able to 
>sell a disc you don't use anymore. You can sell a hardware instrument 
>with its factory sounds, and I see no difference.

I've recently spoken to a lawyer on this very issue.

He has informed me that he is well aware of this practice and that
he already won more than one lawsuit on this. There is a reference
case published by the "Amtsgericht" (however that translates into
english - some local court) Munich which basically says that
prohibiting reselling is to strong restricting the rights of
ownership of a customer to be valid.

At least in germany it is not legal to prohibit reselling. AFAIC
YT is a german company...

>I say that sample libraries should be sold as a *lease,* not a 
>product. That at least would make it clear what's expected of the 
>customer. The EW1 electric car was only leased, for example.

Leases are time limited. As soon as you have this unlimited you
are back to selling a licence to use which of course could be
resold.

>- Likewise, I don't understand the performance restrictions some 
>companies impose. (I'm not talking about Spectrasonics, who just ask 
>for credit on albums - that's perfectly reasonable.) But if you can 
>use the factory sounds you paid for when you bought a hardware 
>instrument any which way you choose, why are samples you bought any 
>different?

Just because some companies write this in their licences does not
mean it would hold in court. At least in germany.

Best,
Michael
--
 Vote against SPAM - see http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/
 Michael Gerdau       email: mgd@...
 Windows 9x is for wannabe computer gurus.
 GPG/PGP-keys available on request or at public keyserver