"When I give, I give myself." -- Walt Whitman
Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 12:31 PM
The legal team representing eBay seller Timothy S. Vernor in a federal lawsuit against Autodesk has filed an amended complaint. The new complaint restates the case in professional language and adds a petition for declaratory judgments and injunctions regarding the legality of Vernor’s actions. As AECnews reported in September, Vernor filed the original suit without benefit of an attorney; citizen advocacy group Public Citizen agreed to represent him after his case was more widely reported, based on our original article.

In an additional development, high-profile Seattle attorney Michael Withey of Seattle is now part of the Vernor legal team. Withey is best known as the attorney to win the first successful personal injury lawsuit filed against former dictator of The Philippines Ferdinand Marcos.

The suit concerns the legality of reselling used copies of Autodesk. Vernor picked up his first used copy of AutoCAD Release 14 at what Public Citizen refers to in the complaint as a “tag sale.” Autodesk claims that the license agreement that ships with the software in the shrink-wrapped box prohibits the purchaser from reselling the software. Public Citizen argues on behalf of Vernor that this contract language is unlawful under the Copyright Act, which guarantees that the owner of a copyrighted product can resell that product without permission.

“The Supreme Court has long recognized that, once a copyright owner has sold a copy of its product, it has no right to control subsequent sales,” says Greg Beck, the Public Citizen attorney who represents Vernor. “Just putting a paper inside the box and calling it a license agreement doesn’t negate that fact. If copyright owners could restrict resale of their products with these so-called agreements, used book and record stores would soon disappear. And if companies could so easily transform a sale into a license, a wide range of statutes that protect purchasers of products could be circumvented with a stroke of a pen.”

“We don't believe that Autodesk can restrict Vernor’s right to resell its products that he legally purchased,” adds Withey in a statement released by Public Citizen.

Vernor’s legal team also contends that Autodesk not only violated copyright law, but it wrongly used the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to repeatedly force eBay to withdraw Vernor’s used software from auction. “The DMCA provides no prior notice or opportunity to respond, and its heightened remedies were meant to fight piracy, not to enforce contracts,” says Beck. “Additionally, even though Autodesk is trying to interpret its license agreement to prohibit all resale of authentic copies of its products, Vernor never signed or agreed to anything.”

The amended complaint asks the court to protect Vernor’s rights to resell AutoCAD software and rule that Autodesk’s license agreement is unenforceable. The lawsuit is pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Specifically, the complaint asks the court to rule that:

  • Vernor’s resale of authentic, used copies of AutoCAD software is lawful, protected by 17 U.S.C. § 109, and does not infringe Autodesk’s copyright or other rights;
  • Autodesk’s “Software License Agreement” is unenforceable or unenforceable as to Vernor;
  • Autodesk has no right to interfere with Vernor’s sale of authentic, used copies of Autodesk software;

The amended complaint also seeks injunctions:

  • prohibiting Autodesk from further interfering with Vernor’s resale of Autodesk software;
  • requiring Autodesk to rescind their DMCA notices of claimed infringement with eBay.

Follow this link to read the text of the amended complaint: Vernor amended complaint 

Related articles:

Watchdog Agency Public Citizen Agrees to Represent eBay Seller Vernor in Suit Against Autodesk
Commenting Readers Run Amok about eBay Seller’s Autodesk Lawsuit
Letters in the Vernor Versus Autodesk Case
Vernor Stands Firm in CCNtv Interview
Vernor Gives Autodesk No Ground in CCNtv Interview
eBay Seller Sues Autodesk for $10 Million
The Man Who Dared to Sell AutoCAD Release 14 on eBay
Vernor No Longer In It Just For The Money (Mature warning)

   --RSN

Technorati Tags: eBay Autodesk copyright digital Millennium suit property rights shrink+wrap

Feedback

# re: New Filing, New High-Profile Lawyer in Vernor v. Autodesk

12/4/2007 6:45 PM by Brian Seitz
As much as I am for the protection of copyrighted materials and anti-piracy, the usage of "shrink-wrapped licenses in a box" I believe constitutes unfair and deceptive practices in the S/W industry as a whole. If it is a license then maybe vendors should be held to a higher standard of product liability and proof of fitness of use instead of the typical --we don't claim it will do anything and it’s your tough luck if it doesn't disclaimers.

In this age where Software is now considered a critical asset to a corporation's success maybe it’s time to reexamine the entire software warranty issues and put it in line with hard good warranties. Possibly having corporations pay damages to the customers for bugs as they constitute a false claim of utility (e.g., if I buy a car and the brakes don't work... If the car continues to require "fixes" the lemon law requires the dealer and manufacturer to buy it back.) I wonder what the impact of being held to hard goods product standards would have on the industry...Could and Autodesk or a PTC survive having hundreds of repurchases due to bugs which customers have previously paid to get fixed under the title maintenance

Comments on this post are closed