Yeah, an informed account of that decision by the actual lawyer for ReDigi was posted on slashdot just this morning.
You telling me NewYorkCountryLawyer is a real lawyer? Damn, I preferred the fictional version --> "6 most badass lawyers ever"
Just a few hours ago Slashdot reported that a judge had refused an injunction against ReDigi, and now they are supposed to have won their case? I'd say there are two possibilities: One, that we have a judge who can run at speeds exceeding the speed of light, because that's the only way a case could have finished so quick. Or second, that the submitter is a clueless twat you didn't understand a word of what he is actually submitting. Since there is no link to any real information, I assume the latter.
Haven't you heard of a 'rocket docket'?
Please stop reading this story and read NYCL's submission [slashdot.org] instead. It has the virtue of being grounded in reality and based on fact.
Yeah, but reality can be so dreary some times.
Hi Ray. You may be right, but when you back up your assertion with a link that says 'please log in to view this page' then I am forced to disagree citing this source.
Sorry my friend
What is "a hot bench"?
It means the judge or judges have read the briefs thoroughly and are highly prepared.
This case isn't about whether digital goods are real or not. It's about you only get to choose one. It's either real or it's not.
Well said.
Congrats to NewYorkCountryLawyer.
Thanks Mister Liberty, but we have a lot of work ahead of us. At least it is clear that we have a well informed, serious judge. Which makes me confident we will ultimately prevail.
A hot bench is when the judge has a lot of questions for the lawyers.
Not necessarily. What I mean when I say "hot bench" is a court that has really read the papers, and done some homework.
And what is being sold by ReDigi is the right to access a file stored upon their cloud storage service which has been offered for sale by the original owner. The file itself is the original taken from the owner, and transferred to the purchaser. The file leaves the sellers PC for cloud storage; It is deleted from the seller's PC by the client software. There is only one copy of the file. The file is assigned a unique identifier to prevent duplicates being sold. The identifier is assigned to the owner's account so they may access the file. When the file is marked for sale and thereby sold, the unique ID is assigned to the buyers' account; The file itself is not copied, moved, duplicated, shifted, or anything else. The new account may access that very same uncopied file, and the seller may not. This is the important distinction being made; The file is the same one the original owner bought the license to own, and it is this file that is on the cloud service, this file (license to own) which is purchased.
Looks to me like you've been RTFA. Are you new here?
Cabbage, n.: A familiar kitchen-garden vegetable about as large and wise as a man's head. -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"