I think you need to make an important distinction here-- when people purchase your game, they own that specific "copy", but you retain the underlying rights (your copyrights, trademarks, etc.). So even if they own that copy, the thing you're selling is the physical or digital copy and not your underlying rights. In order to use that copy, the purchaser needs a license to those rights. If you're planning on transferring aaaaaall of those rights, you can only do it once-- once those rights are assigned, they can't be taken back except in specific circumstances (you'll learn about those if you read into recent comic book law). So even if you say "I want to sell the game, not license", it doesn't make sense unless you're planning on assigning your rights to a single purchaser.

I guess I find this a little confusing. Do movies, music, etc. have EULA's? Music is copyrighted, and if I buy a copy of it I own that copy, but not the rights for the song itself. This is accomplished without any EULA, so what is the difference between that and software? Or am I missing something?

By the way, I have contacted a lawyer, and I am going to get a EULA written up, but I'd still like to understand this stuff better. For one thing, I know what I want, but I don't seem to be able to express it very well.

Under traditional sales law you are NOT selling the rights to the thing, you are selling a copy of the thing.



When you sell a copy of a book, it is just the rights to use the copy for individual use. You don't sell the rights to distribute new copies or the rights to make a sequel, or mass-produce it, or put it on a network library.

When you sell audio tracks, you sell a copy of a recording for individual use. You don't sell the rights to distribute new copies or play it on the radio or post it to youtube.

You sell a copy of sheet music, you sell a copy for individual use. That doesn't transfer the rights to perform your own modification of the music in your own world tour or other performance rights.



It sounds like that is what you want to do. You want to sell a copy of the game; you retain all traditional sale rights. Is that correct?

That is exactly what most EULA try to do. Programming books include disclaimers about how using the code is done at your own risk. Home repair books include disclaimers about how you should not attempt anything beyond your skill and knowledge, and that they disclaim any damage you do to your property even if it was from following an error in the book. Fiction books include disclaimers about how they were not based on any character living or dead. The license agreement with software is really no different; it disclaims you from damage in exactly the same way as the disclaimer in the book.

It is not something evil or bad, and just as necessary as the warnings about not locking yourself into a fridge, or the notice in books not to put it on a media retrieval system.

Under traditional sales law you are NOT selling the rights to the thing, you are selling a copy of the thing.



When you sell a copy of a book, it is just the rights to use the copy for individual use. You don't sell the rights to distribute new copies or the rights to make a sequel, or mass-produce it, or put it on a network library.

When you sell audio tracks, you sell a copy of a recording for individual use. You don't sell the rights to distribute new copies or play it on the radio or post it to youtube.

You sell a copy of sheet music, you sell a copy for individual use. That doesn't transfer the rights to perform your own modification of the music in your own world tour or other performance rights.



It sounds like that is what you want to do. You want to sell a copy of the game; you retain all traditional sale rights. Is that correct?

That is exactly what most EULA try to do. Programming books include disclaimers about how using the code is done at your own risk. Home repair books include disclaimers about how you should not attempt anything beyond your skill and knowledge, and that they disclaim any damage you do to your property even if it was from following an error in the book. Fiction books include disclaimers about how they were not based on any character living or dead. The license agreement with software is really no different; it disclaims you from damage in exactly the same way as the disclaimer in the book.

It is not something evil or bad, and just as necessary as the warnings about not locking yourself into a fridge, or the notice in books not to put it on a media retrieval system.

Yes, that is exactly what I want to do. Sell a copy of the game, with me retaining traditional sale rights. And offer no warranty, and if their computer blows up, I'm not responsible.

The reason I am specifically asking is that I have read the EULA's of some things I "purchased," only to find that the EULA actually claimed I don't even own my copy of the game, and that I am essentially renting it. It is this that I strongly wish to avoid doing with my own software. Most customers might not care, but for those that do, I'd like to support the idea of property ownership. Does this come up much, or is it just me that is bothered by this trend?

Under traditional sales law you are NOT selling the rights to the thing, you are selling a copy of the thing.

...

That is exactly what most EULA try to do. ...

It is not something evil or bad, and just as necessary as the warnings about not locking yourself into a fridge, or the notice in books not to put it on a media retrieval system.

I agree with frob's post - though I'd note that part of the reason EULAs have a bad name is that some of them aren't just about disclaimers, but insist you "agree" to all sorts of other things (e.g., as Dark_Oppressor says) to be able to use it after you've bought it, which is not something that music, books etc get you to do.

But yes, I agree with the point that it should be perfectly possible to sell something that means someone can use it, without that implying you've given up rights, and I don't see that a licence let alone "agreement" is required, either to allow them to use it, or to prevent one giving up their copyright rights.

(Well, to be sure, some countries like the UK had problems that even copying on your own system was a copyright violation, so theoretically a "licence" is required to copy from CD to disk to RAM, though I believe this has been fixed. Also the same issue applied for ripping mp3s from a CD you bought for personal use, but I don't think anyone ever cared about that in practice - either from the point of preventing people from doing it, or worrying about EULAs in order to allow it.)