Is it possible to sell the products that are purchased online and downloaded?I have several, that only work in FS2002...that are taking up hard drive space.Would like to transfer license/sell them to someone, if thst is possible.I know that many companies will not allow this, but need to check...its like throwing money in the toilet, otherwise. My hope was to sell all my 2002 stuff on burn those items to a CD or something and include them....Emma Field, FSSE, FSSoundscape..a couple of planes...I will post to Lago as well on their products, and to the associated vendors...but someone here may know the answer.Thanks

I asked one of the vendors about this a while back; I think it was FSD International. The answer was something like "no, read your license agreement".I am not in the practice of pirating software, so I elected not to try to give the add-on aircraft installer to a friend. However - if I've paid money for, say, a toaster, and I'm not using it anymore, then I should be able to sell the toaster. In My Humble Opinion software is no different no matter what anyone says. So this sort of attitude that many or all of the vendors have (not just flight sim ones) is mildly annoying.There are many things in life that are much more annyoying - spam, adware, smokers that throw their still-lit butts out of their car windows, terrorists, Dubya - in that order - so I don't dwell on this much.Dave BlevinsP.S. the toaster *is* for sale.

But imagine if by owning a toaster you also had the ability to make multiple copies of it and box 'em up and distribute them to your friends free of charge. I'll bet you'd see a different policy on the part of toaster makers then!As for your other annoyances, I couldn't agree more. Oh sure, I might bump Dubya a little higher on the list, but other than that right on!Happy New Year!

Generally speaking, software companies take the position that their license agreements forbid you from reselling software you've bought. Historically, the courts had not supported this position - in the few cases that had been settled they ruled that if you bought a license, you had the right to sell it. Unfortunately, one of Al Gores pet projects while still VP was pushing through a new digital copyright law that changed all that. Not only does it allow a 'no resales' license, it even allows software companies to use CPU serial no's in generating unlock keys in order to require buyers to buy a new license if they upgrade their computer.Richard

>However - if I've paid money for, say, a toaster, and I'm not>using it anymore, then I should be able to sell the toaster.>In My Humble Opinion software is no different no matter what>anyone says. So this sort of attitude that many or all of the>vendors have (not just flight sim ones) is mildly annoying.Your analogy with the Toaster is not quite correct.With software you are not purchasing the software, you are purchasing the 'license' with its terms limitations etc. With the Toaster you are actually purchasing the toaster outright. You own the toaster after the purchase is complete.Purchasing a software license is more akin to a leasing agreement.Example you lease a car, you can use the car, but you really do not own the car. You are limited to the terms of the lease in your use of the car, and you certainly cannot sell the car.Same with some software license agreements , you purchase the right to use the software under the terms of the license agreement, but you do not own the software like you would own the toaster.You refer to this practice as an 'attitude' by the software complanies.I think its really the only way the software companies can operate considering how easily one can copy and transfer their products.Now if everyone wants to start ignoring license agreements, etc,etc....IMO what would happen would be the end of easy and straight forward downloadable software sales. And more inconvience WRT to purchasing and Installing software.Regards.Ernie.

Not sure I agree with your conclusion, Ernie. People already do copy and transfer software illegally...by preventing the legal transfer of a license it only encourages the law abiding to cross to the dark side. Once there, lots of folks may find they like it. When law fails to make sense to the sensible, folks tend to ignore it.Much of the shrink wrap license agreements that come with software these days is unenforceable to begin with...it's intended to cow the legally ignorant and the meek into compliance.In the infitessimally small chance that such a sale actually came to the attention of the software maker, would they *really* be likely to pursue the unsanctioned transfer of a legally-acquired license, rather than spending their resources going after the pirates who do the real damage? They'd be blithering idiots if they did.IMHO, such a sale is a legal infraction on the same order of magnitude as jaywalking. Who really cares?RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Washington, D.C.

So are all those people selling off their old games etc on Ebay doing something illegal?

>So are all those people selling off their old games etc on Ebay >doing something illegal? In several cases they are illagal. It depends on the license agreement for the software.But just cause it illegal doesn't stop people from trying to sell it on Ebay anyway.Regards.Ernie.

>Not sure I agree with your conclusion, Ernie. >>People already do copy and transfer software illegally...by >preventing the legal transfer of a license it only encourages the >law >abiding to cross to the dark side.I think allowing the legal transfer as you put it, would actually encourage more to cross to the dark side because the legal risk is completely gone.Person A sells his license to person B, and keeps a copy for himself, no-one would ever know.Person B sells his license purchased from Person A to person C, and also keeps a copy from himself, and Person D does the same thing.So now there are multiple copies of this license out there, and only one copy is legal.Now say you the software producer finds out about this, now who do you go after for violating the copyright ?Person A ? Well he says he sold it to person B. Person B ? Well he says he sold it to person C.Person C ? Well he denies ever purchasing it from Person B.So now you the software producer have no legal rights to stop this illegal distribution of your software.But.. if you prevent person A from transferring to Person B by license agreement. Then Person A can be held resposible should his license be transferred or distributed.Look at all those folks that were downloading copyrighted music, tc from Kazaa, napster, etc. Were they doing it because the record companies said they can't transfer their records ? Or was it because the chance of being caught and prosecuted was extremely small ?It was/is clearly the latter.>Much of the shrink wrap license agreements that come with software these days is unenforceable to begin with...it's intended to cow >the legally ignorant and the meek into compliance.The 'shrink wrap' license agreement though legally questionable does still offer some protection from copyright infringement. Because it nullifies the premise if implied permission WRT to copyrights. the license agreement affirms there is no implication whatsoever that permission to distribute copyrighted works was given by the copyright holder.Plus you can get around the 'shrink wrap' status by makingthe license agreement viewable by potential customers before the sale is made. Those license agreements are legally binding.>In the infitessimally small chance that such a sale actually came >to the attention of the software maker, would they *really* be >likely to pursue the unsanctioned transfer of a legally-acquired >license, rather than spending their resources going after the >pirates who do the real damage? They'd be blithering idiots if >they did.I don't agree. They would indeed go after the first cog in the distribution chain. But with downloaded software the chance that it is discovered by the software maker is not that small actually. Since many download sales have one unique reg key for each user. If that unique reg key gets out somehow , there's only one customer it could have come from.>IMHO, such a sale is a legal infraction on the same order of >magnitude as jaywalking. Who really cares?Well I would assume if its your product then you might care.Regards.Ernie.

>Plus you can get around the 'shrink wrap' status by making>the license agreement viewable by potential customers before>the sale is made. Those license agreements are legally>binding.Just pitching in with my 2 cents here. No license agreement is legally binding if it contravenes the law of the land. Therefore if a particular country is not a signatory to the international copyright act(s) and the software is purchased in that country then that part of the license agreement that relies on the international copyright act is null and void. In addition, if the law of the land does not distinguish between say a toaster and a piece of software then no amount of legalese in a license agreement will make the sale of said software illegal.There are countries that do not recognise the international copyright act(s). --qnh

All you say is basically true. But do we really want to be in a situation where license agreements are totally useless ?Developers can get around much of the software licenses too, with technology.It makes things more difficult for the average user, in particular during setup and installation. And it will no doubt raise the average price of software.But that will be the resulting norm of if standard license agreements become completely useless.Then users won't have to worry about transferring their licenses, because the technology won't let them. And we are starting to see some Flightsim developers going in this direction with downloadable software that only works on one specific PC/system, and has to be registered with the software producer before it can be used.Regards.Ernie.

I understand what you are saying Ernie, however if a loophole exists then as sure as the sun is shining outside my window (/me looks, yes it is) then people will exploit it.--qnh

>I understand what you are saying Ernie, however if a loophole >exists then as sure as the sun is shining outside my window (/me >looks, yes it is) then people will exploit it.True, but the key is to keep the loophole small so only a small number of people can exploit it.Regards.Ernie.

Well, this thread confirms, even more, my decision not to buy payware any more. You don't get these problems with freeware.And talking about the legality of selling your software license, what about those developers who tell you that because you are buying electronically they will not give you a refund under any circumstances? They are acting illegally in as much as they are infringing your statutory rights.And then there are some developers who will refuse to maintain your licence if you say anything which upsets them.Stick to freeware, that's what I say.David

The laws regarding software copyrights are impossible to police! I will NEVER buy a product that requires "binding" to my computer .... it's totally OTT!I also stick with freeware, but I did purchase 767PIC a few months back :). I only buy 100% reliable software!