Ebay ripoff ebay suspended email refuse cancelled auctions VERO linux oem software auctions San Jose California

"Which version were you using, as that makes a difference."

Both GPLv2 and GPLv3 make provisions for redistribution of covered software.

"And did Linux themselves ask you to stop, or was it ebay?"

Unless Linus Torvalds - the originator of the Linux kernel, and current owner of the Linux trademark - objected to the redistribution of a Linux system, only eBay could've stepped in to prevent sale of the system disc. At issue is whether Thomas's auction complied with the letter of the GPL, only to arbitrarily be ended anyway.

"Denny, you cannot pirate software that is FREE, unless you don't distribute the source code."

That's pretty much the gist of the GPL. There are, however, "free" software licences that do not allow redistribution, among other things - these should not be qualified in the same breath as "free software" licences for a number of reasons.

Suggested Reading:
"The Free Software Definition"
Free Software Foundation / Richard M. Stallman
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

So from this answer, we do know that you violated the TOS of Ebay as well as the linux license. YoU were trying ot make money on ebay selling pirated software.


Denny, you cannot pirate software that is FREE, unless you don't distribute the source code.

Which version were you using, as that makes a difference. And did Linux themselves ask you to stop, or was it ebay?

########
I already had permission and for the ones I did not have, their terms and conditions allow the distribution of their CDs on the net.
##########

"So can you provide this legal documentation from your lawyer, signed and notraized by the copyright holders giving YOU EXPLICIT permission to sell copies of their program via cd through EBAy?

Before you answer, this must be a hard copy of a contract that you must have in hand RIGHT NOW, and prior to any auction you posted.

And explicit meaning that they must have spelt it out in EXACT detail that they were going to ALLOW you to sell those CD's on ebay. That means, in that contract, EBAY must be metioned.

You dont have to answer, because we already know that answer...

A BIG FAT NO."

Denny, perhaps you are unfamiliar with the GNU General Public Licence, version 2, which any Linux ISO would have been distributed under at the time? I would like to call your attention specifically to the preamble, paragraph 2, second sentence:

# Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you
have *the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for
this service if you wish)*, that you receive source code or can get it
if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it
in new free programs; and that you know you can do these things. # (emphasis added)

The simple fact of the matter is that the governing licence of most Linux distributions covers this method of distribution, and should not be infringed upon by an arbitrary judgment by a non-judicial entity. Again, I call your attention to the GPLv2, this time to the seventh clause:

# If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent
infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues),
conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not
excuse you from the conditions of this License. #

As the licence elsewhere makes mention of measures intended to stymie software patenting efforts, a practice which has been codified under the GPLv3, one is left to assume that these provisions only extend to a corporate entity inasmuch as it acts in the interests of its customers. In that regard, Thomas has caused no injury to eBay or its clients, and such cannot be proven solely by the licensing terms. However, were it to be found that Thomas had no interest in distributing the source code with the system itself, then it might be argued that he intentionally withheld access to a critical part of the system and thus violated a non-negotiable clause, as in clause three, subsection a:

# 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:

a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software
interchange; or,

b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
customarily used for software interchange; #

However, as the first clause permits the practice of charging for the "physical act of transferring a copy", it may be inferred that a "prima facie" case may be made in support of placing a copy for sale on the eBay service. In light of subsection b, however, it becomes clear that a valid claim could be made against "excessive pricing" of the covered software. Neither claim has been fully explored in a court of law, so it is difficult to determine the outcome of any legal case prior to any established precedent. The second paragraph of the first clause, the relevant portion (if you are interested, reads as follows:

# You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and
you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee. #

All of this may freely be verified on the governing entity's site, herein referred to as the "Free Software Foundation" or "FSF":
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/info/GPLv2.html

#######

This was my way of distributing Linux for the cjeapest price on Ebay - other Ebay members were selling the same items as mine for 3-4 times the price, yet they are still on Ebay and no removal of their auctions or suspensions like I did.

####

"So from this answer, we do know that you violated the TOS of Ebay as well as the linux license. YoU were trying ot make money on ebay selling pirated software."

The GPLv2, at the time concerned "the Linux licence", does not expressly prohibit this practice. Resorting to categorising a practice that is, thus far, legal under a moniker that implies illegality is disingenuous, at best. Thomas violated no tested precedent of the law, and yet his account was discontinued by an arbitrary judgment.

"Did you look over the license agreement of the dissemination of the LInux software and understand that it can only be distrbuted freely how they deemed it, and no amount of 'wording' in your auction (ie only costing you the cost of the cd and shipping ) is going to save you from that legal point?"

He filed his due diligence when he posted an honest cost assessment of the disc; nothing further is required under the GPLv2. Might I ask how you arrived at your carefully weighed opinions?

"Did you have a lawyer discuss this with you prior you to posting this latest reply?

I doubt it."

One does not need a lawyer present to represent oneself. In this case, unless he decided to distribute an entire distribution *less some manner of accessing the source code*, no wrongdoing can safely be attributed on Thomas's part.

########

Is Ebay allowed to act judge and jury when they upped the suspensions from 6, 12 then indefinite when I emailed them for reinstatement ?

########

"Yes, they are allowed to. ITS their servers their policies and you are a GUEST using it as a venue to sell pirated software, and WERE WARNED (you admitted) by Ebay that listing the software was in violation of their policies, and continued to do so anyway! They could suspend anyone for ANY REASON at ANY TIME, and really do not have to tell you why."

Actually, every time a business entity uses their "right against criminal trespass" they may find themselves in a very actionable position. First, the actual policy would need to be proven, and those definitions accepted under the current rule of law. Not all of eBays policies can legally apply to every jurisdiction, which is precisely why they filed as a corporation in a legally "convenient" location in the first place. However, that venue may be challenged, particularly when a defendant with minimal resources lives halfway across the country from the court in question (due process). Second, they would have to provide the actual policy they believe to have been broken; you seem to be under the impression that "Replica, Counterfeit Items and Unauthorized Copies"

(http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/replica-counterfeit.html) was violated; however, in a realistic sense, their "Recordable Media" (http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/recordable.html) policy is more deliberately vague, so they'd likely see better success pursuing that avenue.

However, their response is disproportionate simply because - as a third item - *they cannot prove that their policies were ever broken unless he left out a simple GPL notice (which, at the time, was not a requirement) or refused to provide the source for any cost*.

"Just like if you were to panhandle at your shopping mall, the mall security would have every right to kick you off their property. Ebay's site is ebay's property, and can 'kcik' you off anytime, especially , if they find you BREAKING Their rules."

The problem with what you're saying here is that your average shopping mall has sanitary concerns to uphold, to say nothing of the fire hazard posed by a transient setting up shop in the open aisles. eBay, on the other hand, has a legal and moral obligation to provide the end user with reasonable satisfaction. Prohibiting a user from distributing *legally acquired goods*, then banning him when he - justifiably - responds (undoubtedly with carefully considered expletives) to the situation is NOT a good start.

"You were at fault, and have only yourself to blame. ONCE one warning was given, YOU should have contacted the makers of your LInux package and find out what are the accepted forms of diseminating the software that wouldn't be against their license agreement AND at the same, NOT continue to list the item for auction on EBAY When YOU were wanred NOT TO DO SO!"

Actually, in this case, eBay failed to do their due diligence. Doing what you propose has a chilling effect on the end user in that they must fully read and comprehend every aspect of copyright law PRIOR TO using the eBay service. Would you buy a car if someone told you that you may be sued for "head injury due to loose lug nut"? Wouldn't you want to know WHY that car might have a loose lug nut? Their sole response - to randomly ban any user who happens to distribute software *under a licence that explicitly allows it*, then *escalate the situation because they managed to irk said user* - is completely asinine. Now, Thomas could have withheld his goods until a reasonable compromise was reached with the eBay Corporation, but interstate commerce regulations EXPLICITLY prohibit tortuous interference that results in a release date some time between "Duke Nukem Forever" and "the approximate heat-death of the universe".

Thomas, if I knew anybody in your area, I'd strongly recommend them to you.

false.
#####################################################
I already had permission and for the ones I did not have, their terms and conditions allow the distribution of their CDs on the net.
###################################################

So can you provide this legal documentation from your lawyer, signed and notraized by the copyright holders giving YOU EXPLICIT permission to sell copies of their program via cd through EBAy?

Before you answer, this must be a hard copy of a contract that you must have in hand RIGHT NOW, and prior to any auction you posted.

And explicit meaning that they must have spelt it out in EXACT detail that they were going to ALLOW you to sell those CD's on ebay. That means, in that contract, EBAY must be metioned.

You dont have to answer, because we already know that answer...

A BIG FAT NO.

###################################################

This was my way of distributing Linux for the cjeapest price on Ebay - other Ebay members were selling the same items as mine for 3-4 times the price, yet they are still on Ebay and no removal of their auctions or suspensions like I did.

###################################################

So from this answer, we do know that you violated the TOS of Ebay as well as the linux license. YoU were trying ot make money on ebay selling pirated software.

Did you look over the license agreement of the dissemination of the LInux software and understand that it can only be distrbuted freely how they deemed it, and no amount of "wording" in your auction (ie only costing you the cost of the cd and shipping ) is going to save you from that legal point?

Did you have a lawyer discuss this with you prior you to posting this latest reply?

I doubt it.


###################################################



Is Ebay allowed to act judge and jury when they upped the suspensions from 6, 12 then indefinite when I emailed them for reinstatement ?

###################################################

Yes, they are allowed to. ITS their servers their policies and you are a GUEST using it as a venue to sell pirated software, and WERE WARNED (you admitted) by Ebay that listing the software was in violation of their policies, and continued to do so anyway! They could suspend anyone for ANY REASON at ANY TIME, and really do not have to tell you why.

Just like if you were to panhandle at your shopping mall, the mall security would have every right to kick you off their property. Ebay's site is ebay's property, and can "kcik" you off anytime, especially , if they find you BREAKING Their rules.

You were at fault, and have only yourself to blame. ONCE one warning was given, YOU should have contacted the makers of your LInux package and find out what are the accepted forms of diseminating the software that wouldn't be against their license agreement AND at the same, NOT continue to list the item for auction on EBAY When YOU were wanred NOT TO DO SO!

I already had permission and for the ones I did not have, their terms and conditions allow the distribution of their CDs on the net.

This was my way of distributing Linux for the cjeapest price on Ebay - other Ebay members were selling the same items as mine for 3-4 times the price, yet they are still on Ebay and no removal of their auctions or suspensions like I did.

Is Ebay allowed to act judge and jury when they upped the suspensions from 6, 12 then indefinite when I emailed them for reinstatement ?

You can't sell pirated software its illegal. Yes yes yes I understand its free to download...but you still can't copy the program and sell it.

What you should have done was sold the CD. Somwhere in your title stating that the program was on it.

Same way its illegal to sell sports tickets for over their face value...so you sell a Terrible Towel with 2 free tickets to the Steeler Game. Your not selling the tickets...your selling the towel.

Reregister w/a new cc, and ebay will leave you alone.

Go to any Linux distribution site and read the fine print. it is free for *Download* and you are not allowed to *resell* their product. What Ebay did was proper, and you are lucky to not have been prosecuted for copyright infringement.
All Linux distributions are available *for a fee* on CD or DVD... copying and reselling these *IS* copyright infringement.