Ghost in a Jar? Doesn't really compare to Dick in a Box!

People do this all the time.
And it's perfectly legal to do, they just have to provide the source for free. You can still charge for the media and supporting the product. (Supporting the product is originally what some of the original open source authors had in mind.)

Selling snippets of source code is pretty silly though. What happens if you sell broken source code though?

No, this auction is not proper, and neither are several of the replies here. Selling a disc with F/OSS software is legal as long as you follow the rules, although somewhat annoying.


You cannot legally sell what you do not own.

Additionally, you cannot "sell" source code in this manner. Intellectual property rights must be transferred or assigned. This must take place in writing, not electronically.

Some rights cannot be sold or transferred, including author's related rights. The transfer or assignment of rights must address this, along with the scope of the agreement.

The item is either a hoax or a misinformed individual.

/edit: Add note about selling discs of F/OSS software, since the post was not there when I first loaded the page.

[Edited by - frob on October 21, 2009 8:31:05 PM]

I would buy that if I was a professor teaching low level CS classes and had an assignment where I had them write this.

But then again, I love giving out zeros on assignments I know are copied.

Quote: Original post by Codeka
If they're selling theirs for 99c, I'll sell you std::list for 89c. Bargain! I'll even include the documentation for free!

O'Reilly does that.

Quote: Original post by frob
Additionally, you cannot "sell" source code in this manner. Intellectual property rights must be transferred or assigned. This must take place in writing, not electronically.

Some rights cannot be sold or transferred, including author's related rights. The transfer or assignment of rights must address this, along with the scope of the agreement.

What is the difference between that transfer, and the license right transfer for buying a copy of software?

Quote: Original post by frob
No, this auction is not proper, and neither are several of the replies here. Selling a disc with F/OSS software is legal as long as you follow the rules, although somewhat annoying.


You cannot legally sell what you do not own.

Additionally, you cannot "sell" source code in this manner. Intellectual property rights must be transferred or assigned. This must take place in writing, not electronically.

Some rights cannot be sold or transferred, including author's related rights. The transfer or assignment of rights must address this, along with the scope of the agreement.

The item is either a hoax or a misinformed individual.

/edit: Add note about selling discs of F/OSS software, since the post was not there when I first loaded the page.

I am not sure if you are referring to the tutorial that I linked. I have no clue at all if the Ebay seller in the OP has used one of these tutorials (they are all the same code snippet), so I do not want to make people think that this user has actually just copied a tutorial and is selling it. I cannot say one way or the other.

I am also not sure if this is a code snippet, or how it is delivered. I was just thinking about what to call it, since it only says "class", with no mention of the form in which it is delivered as far as I saw. It may not actually be raw code, and the more I think about it, it probably isn't, because then people would see that it is only 50 or 60 lines.

As far as not being able to sell code, are you sure? I am not 100% sure, but it doesn't seem like an auction like this would actually be transferring the rights to the buyer, since the seller still owns the code. It seems like it would be no different than buying a game you download off the internet. You don't really have any rights to the media, except the right to play it, and nothing needs to be done in writing. Are there specific laws regarding programming code? It seems like selling code would be no different than selling a poem, which is perfectly legal to do. You could either sell the rights, and you no longer own it, or you could just sell a copy, and still retain full rights.

I guess I am just a bit confused about the seller's rights to sell their code like this. Assuming that they did design and create the class on their own, why can they not sell it like this?

EDIT: Sorry, I missed in the questions at the bottom that he does say it will be sent as source code. And it also does not give any terms of the usage of the code. I am wondering if maybe this is what you were talking about. But you did say they cannot be transferred electronically, so I am confused there. If he did give the normal license blurb about it being usable for private and commercial projects, etc., would there still be a problem? And if so, what is that problem? I am curious on this one.

EDIT2: And I am almost positive it was another account of the user that asked the questions in the auction, because the third question actually says something like "I am sure my code could benefit enormously from such a finely crafted class..." or something like that. But...we have not seen how "finely crafted" it is, and have no idea how well it functions lol. That is pretty sad.

Quote: Original post by Talroth
What is the difference between that transfer, and the license right transfer for buying a copy of software?

The transfer in the ebay auction, at least the part of it that is visible, is not a sale at all.


The seller will email a copy of some source code to the buyer.

His little disclaimer only says that he is not responsible for what the code does.

It does not confer the right to use the code. It does not grant the right to make derivative works from the code. It does not confer the right to sell or transfer the code within your work if you later get rid of the work. It does not assert that the seller has the right to sell it, or that it is not legally encumbered. Basically, it does not transfer any legal rights.


The options are for the seller to provide a general license which explicitly grants permission to use it, or for them to provide a written transfer of rights. Both documents have several specific legal requirements in order to be valid.

If the buyer does not get either a license granting the right to use it, or a written transfer of ownership, then the seller can come back at a later date and sue for copyright infringement. The auction shows an intent to sell so a judge may rule on that, but without an actual license assigning the rights, or an actual transfer of rights, there would be a strong case that he never sold it.

Quote: Q: Is this a US only item, or would you consider shipping overseas? I'm in the UK, and I'm sure my code would benefit enormously from such a finely crafted accessory...
A: Source code will be emailed to the buyer.

this item must be a joke. You can find a double linked list implementation on google in far less time than buying this item

edit: Oh I noticed that it is not a "buy it now" item, it is on auction!

Quote: Original post by frob

Quote: Original post by Talroth
What is the difference between that transfer, and the license right transfer for buying a copy of software?

The transfer in the ebay auction, at least the part of it that is visible, is not a sale at all.


The seller will email a copy of some source code to the buyer.

His little disclaimer only says that he is not responsible for what the code does.

It does not confer the right to use the code. It does not grant the right to make derivative works from the code. It does not confer the right to sell or transfer the code within your work if you later get rid of the work. It does not assert that the seller has the right to sell it, or that it is not legally encumbered. Basically, it does not transfer any legal rights.


The options are for the seller to provide a general license which explicitly grants permission to use it, or for them to provide a written transfer of rights. Both documents have several specific legal requirements in order to be valid.

If the buyer does not get either a license granting the right to use it, or a written transfer of ownership, then the seller can come back at a later date and sue for copyright infringement. The auction shows an intent to sell so a judge may rule on that, but without an actual license assigning the rights, or an actual transfer of rights, there would be a strong case that he never sold it.

Ok, thats what I thought. I noticed on my second read through the auction that he does not give any rights.