[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

the moving contract schelling point (Re: Security by Not Peeking) (fwd)



----- Forwarded message from Adam Back -----

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 21:13:31 -0500
From: Adam Back <[email protected]>
Subject: CDR: the moving contract schelling point (Re: Security by Not Peeking)

[ text delted ]

Lets say book store X is a lot cheaper than book store Y: most people
buy from book store X, not caring if they break the stupid license.

[ more text deleted ]

----- End of forwarded message from Adam Back -----

There is a critical problem, the assumption that both stores are acting on
the same license. This is a bad assumption but...

If we accept it we are left with the conclusion that the seller of books
without the label is acting in violation of contract and is at fault. That 
means the contract between that seller and the purchasers were not valid. In 
effec the purchasers of the second store have received stolen merchandise.

It would be more complicated when we got to the book re-seller. The tape 
would have been removed so the special limits of the original license
wouldn't apply any more I suspect. So no problem there one way or another.

I suspect that the marketing value of not prosecuting would be worth much
more than being literal minded.


    ____________________________________________________________________

            The future is downloading. Can you hear the impact?

                                        O[rphan] D[rift>]
                                        Cyber Positive

       The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
       Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      [email protected]
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------