... the doctrine is 
inapplicable if an enforceable  agreement -- such as a license agreement
in 
the case of software or a website -- states otherwise.

Wouldn't that then be the case if the agreement specifically said that
you can not sell the site, or that they are leasing it, etc?  If it
doesn't say any of these things, then aren't they free to sell the site
under the "first sale doctrine", or am I not understanding this
correctly?

Jeremy Brown

-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Isenberg [mailto:disenberg(at)gigalaw.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 10:51 AM
To: jeremy(at)localnetamerica.com; 'dale'; hwg-business(at)hwg.org
Subject: RE: Website ownership

At 10:13 AM 10/22/02, jeremy wrote:
>I think a good argument could be made that you were paid to create a
>website, and that the client "purchased" it.  Since they purchased it,
>they can do whatever they want.  Liken this idea to buying a car.

         Ownership of a website cannot be likened to ownership of a 
car.  The former is intellectual property subject to copyright (and
perhaps 
patent and/or trademark) laws.  The latter is tangible property subject
to 
tangible property laws.  While the "first sale doctrine" allows the 
rightful possessor of a copyrighted work to do many things with the work

(such as give a book or painting to someone else), the doctrine is 
inapplicable if an enforceable  agreement -- such as a license agreement
in 
the case of software or a website -- states otherwise.

Doug Isenberg
Attorney at Law
Editor & Publisher, GigaLaw.com (http://www.GigaLaw.com)
Author, "The GigaLaw Guide to Internet Law" (Random House, October 2002)

(http://www.GigaLaw.com/guide)

HTML: hwg-business mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA