Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham
good point and all we do is write a new license for the new owner to sign and charge a small admin fee when we are contacted. It's the people who ignore the license we have problems with. They don't bother to stick to it and sell the content as their own, including it in the price of the site.
So the question is, should people ignore the rules?
|
Paul, I fear we are playing the same record over and over again.
I'll play mine once more, with the utmost respect but also a bit of puzzlement.
If you licensed your content to Mr.Brown, and Mr.Brown resells/relicenses it, he is a very bad guy if he is not authorized by you. You have all reasons to go after Mr. Brown.
But if you licensed your content to Brown Inc., and Brown Inc. sells shares to Mr.Pink, the legal status of Brown Inc. in respect to your licensed content, doesn't change. The licensee is still Brown Inc, and Mr.Pink just has some shares. Brown Inc. does not need to buy new Windows licenses, or renew any existing contract, just because Mr.Pink is now a shareholder.
This is how it works in any "normal" business. Your license contract is likely to follow the same rule. But in case you managed to insert any special clause there which says "every time Mr.Pink buys a share you need to re-licence", then 1) I doubt it is legal 2) in case it is, it is probably a bad business idea. It makes your content virtually unsellable to anyone who pays the due attention to what is written there.
Good luck anyways, I am meaning well and with no irony!