Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!olivea!tymix!cirrusl!sunstorm!dhesi From: dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc Subject: Re: LEGALITY OF SELLING SOFTWARE Message-ID: <2940@cirrusl.UUCP> Date: 11 Feb 91 22:37:39 GMT References: <3929@orbit.cts.com> <70478@microsoft.UUCP> Sender: news@cirrusl.UUCP Organization: Cirrus Logic Inc. Lines: 29 In <70478@microsoft.UUCP> fredf@microsoft.UUCP (Fred FREELAND) writes: >Our licensing agreement says: >3. OTHER RESTRICTIONS.... At a licensing agreement isn't a licensing agreement until you get somebody to agree to abide by it. (The "agreement" does not exist until somebody "agrees".) Traditionally this agreement happens only when somebody signs the license agreement. An unsigned license agreement isn't a license agreement. (Verbal agreements, though legally valid, are nearly impossible to prove or enforce.) I'm sure a lot of software companies wish it weren't so. But until they can get a court ruling confirming that they can make a license agreement binding on a party that hasn't signed it, these license agreements will remain wishful thinking. Software users who are party to a *signed* a license agreement are legally bound by its conditions. The rest of us need only obey copyright law. Publicly available software that is covered neither by a signed license agreement nor by copyright law is probably public domain. The software vendors fully realize this and this is why *in addition* to their license agreements they include stern copyright claims. Such copyright claims would be completely unnecessary if unsigned license agreements had any legal merit. -- Rahul Dhesi UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesi