[mythtv-users] Legality of selling MythTV and its Components?

[Nick Rout]

On Tue, 2 May 2006 23:42:10 -0400
Anthony Vito wrote:


> 
> I call Bullshit. You can't skirt around it that easy. It's not like
> there is a specific legal document here, or even a precedent. The only
> written words from zap2it are "personal, non-commercial use" Some of
> the people they are refering to in this letter,
> http://docs.tms.tribune.com/tech/tmsdatadirect/zap2it/open_letter.html
>  Did just about what you are prescribing. If the product you are
> selling is worthless ( or worth less ) without their data ( which it
> is ) then they will argue ( with a lawsuit ) that that is a commercial
> use. My opinon is they would be right, but that doesn't matter,
> because you can't afford a lawyer anyway.
> 

The seller of the equipment has no need of a  legal connection with
zap2it. They do not need to enter into any license with zap2it. Indeed
they cannot assign any license they have, as it is specifically
non-assignable.

The purchaser of the equipment needs to enter into a license (unless
they use another epg provider). That person will usually be a "personal
and non-commercial". (But that would rule out use for example in a motel
or hotel where the motel proprietor would be the licensee and use of the
mythfrontend and its epg would be paid for in the room rate)

Consider this too: zap2it know and approve mythtv having zap2it
functionality included. They know that mythtv is GPL licensed. They
therefore know that people can sell mythtv systems. In other words the
concept that zap2it capable systems could be sold was legally in their
contemplation when they first got involved with the open/free software
community. These are the opening words of their open letter:

"We at Tribune Media Services and Zap2it.com have been privileged to
offer a TV listings service to the open source and freeware communities"

Having allowed a situation to arise where they have allowed hooks to
their protocol to be included in an open source product, they surely
cannot complain when a product is sold that includes that open source
product.

They still have their rights to prevent such information being re-sold
or re-licensed, such as a commercial or public EPG service, or the motel
situation I contemplated above.

What they don't have the right to do is complain about people selling
open source software!

As someone else pointed out, what they also have the right to do is turn
off the service altogether!

-- 
Nick Rout <nick at rout.co.nz>