Is this leagal?

[Matrix_zero]

Ok, so i am looking at purchasing this program to use the source code to icorporate into my program. The software is approximitily 450.00 for what they call 'unlimited royalty free distribution' and goes on to talk about being to incorporate the code into any application i develop for inside or outside of my company.

Me and a few others think the 450 is a bit much for what it does but agree between the 6 or 7 or us that if we all chipped in about 65.00 we could purchase this and all share in it.

After all I would be able to "distribute" this to everyone in the group as long as i incorporated it into an application per the license.

What they do with it is not my concern.

 

[Pat Hartman]

Why are you asking us? I don't think that anyone here would tell you that this is appropriate. Your plan violates the spirit of the agreement if not the letter.

 

[sfreeman@co.mer]

Sorry, but I disagree with your conclusion

"After all I would be able to "distribute" this to everyone in the group..." .

You would NOT be able to distribute the program to everyone in your group. You are purchasing ONE license, and may use the source code therein within YOUR new apps and distribute your NEW apps to whomever you wish.

Kinda like having 6 people chip in to buy a book, and then making 6 copies.

Pretty clear copyright violation.

At least you asked :-B

 

[Matrix_zero]

No... what i mean...

No, what i mean is i could incorporate the newley purchased source code, Which i have a an unlimited royalty free license, into a application, lets say an application to keep track of names... or something.

They, the rest of the group would get the application i created, not just the raw code. It only happens to contain the source codes.

Lets say the 65.00 i paid was a fee to purchase my application and not as a way of splitting the cost. Since they only purchased MY application.

If they used those source codes they would possibly be in violation of coppyright laws, not me correct?

 

[Crilen007]

The point is not to give out the source code.

 

[sfreeman@co.mer]

Not trying to be difficult here, but if your intent is to circumvent the copyright protection of the original author's property, then you lose.

Subterfuge is the word often used for this tactic.


I find this text to be helpful on legal issues:

http://www.greatideagear.com/software.dev.legal.gd.html

 

[ChrisO]

Matrix_zero

Let’s try to put the answer another way; what would you expect when trying to sell a $450.00 product?

450 people chip in $1.00 and freely distribute it, in whole or in part, with 'unlimited royalty free distribution' to not only members of the group but also post it on the Web and charge for the download ’with distribution constraints’.

It would seem that if you found your original code on the Web, and paid to download it ’with distribution constraints’, then you may not be able to freely distribute your original code with 'unlimited royalty free distribution' as you see fit.

This could lead to a situation whereby if you sell even one copy with 'unlimited royalty free distribution' then you are selling the sovereign rights to that product and I doubt if that is what you had mind.

It would seem to have a simple answer…ask your company to buy it for you and state the circumstances under which you intend to use it.

Your company should have legal advice and as they say “Why have a dog and bark yourself?”

Regards,
Chris.

 

[WindSailor]

Another viewpoint...

Most likely this program will have some kind of security level with different levels of protocol.
Do you think that Microsoft is the only one that has individual machine locking protocols?
Most all of the software protection programs that are for sale to developers have machine ID locking provisions on them with a variety of options to support that, including keeping a tally of how many installs, machine ID's etc. on THEIR server. The options here are basically unlimited and not all are published.
AND most competent developers ARE aware of all of the hack sites... and keep track of the software they use and check the hack sites for their versions.
So enter the area of support, you now have a hacked or distributed version of the developers program, support is now cut off, and no upgrade options are available. And... you are selling or distributing YOUR programs with this distributed version with your name on it...

Now... what is it you that you wanted to do?

 

[WindSailor]

To take things further...

What level of protection do you think developers should be able to take to protect their Intellectual Rights?

This is a very important question.

There has been many discussions, debates, articles on just how far developers should go in taking an active stance or active posture in protecting their rights.

And I dare say, most are won on morality.

To my knowledge there are VERY VERY few who really take an active stance in protecting their rights by integrating security options in their programs to alter or change the end users computer who circumvent the developers agreement. Again, these options and abilities are UNLIMITED here.

Unfortunately I believe more and more developers will cross that barrier in the future and the legal system will set Precedence.