On 17/01/2013 5:27 PM, scott wrote:
>> And I am sure that it was obvious that they were free samples. Or you
>> would not have taken them.
>
> To many the Adobe CS2 download page is obviously

???

> them giving away the software for free -

Wishful thinking is the kindest thing that I would say.

> I doubt most people would even give it a second
> thought and would just download the software (unless they happened to
> have heard about the controversy) in exactly the same way they download
> free software from other authors' sites.
>

That is all right then.


>
> IANAL, but if downloading software without the correct license is not
> theft but copyright infringement, there's a similar clause in that law:
>

IANAL either (I have more morals than that).

> "97 Provisions as to damages in infringement action.
>
[snip]
>


> So again the judge would ask the court, did the downloader have a reason
> to believe the software on that page was not free. Given that it is
> distributed in exactly the same way free software is,

You are sounding more and more like some one else, Scott. :-(
Are you just taking a "stance"?

> and not how paid
> software is usually distributed then it might be tricky to insist the
> downloader should have known they had to pay for it.
>

Before the internet was even thought of, there was a saying (or two).
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
If it looks too good to be true then it probably isn't true.
Etc. etc.

I am just saying that people who say that "It does not say that it is 
not free so it must be free." are naive and laying themselves open to a 
comeback.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message