Recently, I
discussed the Vernor v. Autodesk case under the blog posting “Does Copyright
Law Prohibit the Sale of Used Software on eBay?”. After Autodesk got a few of Timothy Vernor’s auction listings for used copies of AUTOCAD bounced off of eBay, Vernor filed a lawsuit asking for a declaratory judgment that his sale of the used software was legal.
Rather than backing down, Autodesk asked for a dismissal of Vernor’s lawsuit or for a summary judgment ruling in its favor. The court refused Autodesk’s request. After doing numerous somersaults and back flips through diverging case law precedent, a federal court in the state of Washington decided that Autodesk had sold rather than licensed copies of AUTOCAD to a Seattle architecture firm. The Seattle architecture firm subsequently sold the copies to Vernor. As a result, the first sale doctrine applies
to the AUTOCAD copies and Vernor’s sale of the used AUTOCAD software on eBay is not
copyright infringement.
I wish I could stop my blog entry right here and tell you that the court's ruling is the end of the story. But that would make life too easy. So I continue . . .