Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!boulder!sunybcs!ugkamins
From: ugkamins@sunybcs.uucp (John Kaminski)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Used DPAINT [I & II] for sale
Message-ID: <5237@cs.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 13 Apr 89 05:09:06 GMT
References: <16386@oberon.USC.EDU> <6789@ecsvax.UUCP> <16404@oberon.USC.EDU> <16958@cup.portal.com> <16459@oberon.USC.EDU> <17050@cup.portal.com>
Sender: nobody@cs.Buffalo.EDU
Reply-To: ugkamins@sunybcs.UUCP (John Kaminski)
Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science
Lines: 13

Has anyone in this matter considered the original purchaser as yet another
distributer in the creator to consumer chain?

As long as some uprgrade package is not used on the copy that is sold, why
should reselling it be wrong?

Why can't I sell a used book (intellectual property) after I read it a while?

How can libraries get away with freely disseminating their collective
intellectual contents without direct charge to the users?  (only indirect
through taxes, overdue fees, or whatever)

In short, in my humble, non-law-student-or-practicing-lawer opinion, why not?