The darn One Year Adventure Novel license thing...

[Ginevra]

Okay, so I got the OYAN. I wanted this partially for myself (I have a fantasy novel in the works) and partially for my dd, if she wants to do it. But their weird license agreement thing is making me feel very uncomfortable and hampered. For those who don't know, there's a slip of paper in the package that says, "You were not sold these materials. You obtained a license for your household for indefinite use. If you wish to use it for more than one student, you must obtain a new workbook. You may not sell the materials or you will void your license." (I'm paraphrasing from memory.)

 

This is so darn weird! And what does it actually mean? The package contains a workbook, a textbook, several lessons on DVD and some "resource novels" I could print off a CD. What is to stop us both from watching the videos and both reading the textbook? Is it unethical to do so?

 

What would this mean to you? And keep in mind, this was not inexpensive; I paid $199 for materials that supposedly were not actually sold to me, even though here they are and I need not ever return them.

[mama25angels]

I think it means that if you have another person using the curriculum, you'll need to buy another workbook for them to do so. I don't believe it's unethical for both of you to watch the videos and read the textbook.

[WishboneDawn]

I think Cadam's got it right but even if she hadn't I'd still think they were being unethical. Afterall, this was a slip of paper that you found AFTER the purchase not something you were aware of before you bought it or as a condition of the transaction. Shame on them.

[Ginevra]

Case law has determined that what they are asking of you is not really legal. They are trying to say that you don't really "own" the materials. Case law has decided that if it looks like it is sold, and it acts like it is sold, then it is sold. period. There was a big lawsuit about it awhile back.

 

I believe that what they are saying is legally impossible to enforce and possibly, ethically wrong. They are trying to gouge the consumer by thrusting on them the idea that the materials purchased are actually a lease. Umm, If you lease something forever and you only pay once for materials (not a service) then it is a purchase. They can call it whatever they want but you are not leasing those materials and you would win if they wanted to take it to court. Don't be bullied by this company. Use the materials for you and your dd and be at peace with that.

 

Thank you for that. I thought it was strange. When you say "case law", do you mean in a case for this particular curriclum? Or was it just another similar "sale"?

 

Afterall, this was a slip of paper that you found AFTER the purchase not something you were aware of before you bought it or as a condition of the transaction.

 

That's exactly right. There was no indication when I bought it that it was a "licence agreement" and that these materials supposedly are not sold to me.

[mama25angels]

I think she means that it was just another "similar sale," I guess I won't be buying this curriculum for next year.

[Sumiller]

I also just purchased this for my ds. However, I had spent some time on the website so before purchasing this I was aware of the license agreement.

 

Here is what is posted on the website:

 

 

Household License Agreement

The content of this product is licensed, not sold, to you by Daniel Schwabauer for the exclusive use of one student in your household. Household means you and your immediate family living in the same residence. Additional students in your household may use this product under this household license if they purchase a separate workbook and forum registration.

The video lessons on the DVDs included in this curriculum set may not be shown publicly, including to small groups at a co-op or private school, without purchase of a classroom license.

This license is valid for your household indefinitely. You may use it year after year, as long as each new student using the product purchases a separate workbook and forum registration. However, the license is non-transferable. The curriculum may not be resold to another household. Reselling this product will void this license and invalidate your registration. Thank you for respecting the licensing terms.

 

I don't think he can stop you from selling the materials. The only thing I can make of it is that if you do, you void your registration and the person who bought it from you would also be without registration to the forum. My ds is really enjoying this curriculum and the forum access so I guess I'm just one of those nuts who is willing to pay $199 for something I'll never be able to resell.

[Ginevra]

Yes, I went back to the website and I do see that it says this way down below the purchase info and the Buy Now button.

 

My ds is really enjoying this curriculum and the forum access so I guess I'm just one of those nuts who is willing to pay $199 for something I'll never be able to resell.

__________________

 

That isn't what bugs me. Chances are good that I would never re-sell it anyway; I most often give away used curriculum I no longer need. It's that you're "buying" something - that is, you appear to be buying it, but yet they're throwing this controlling factor into it. It's like trying to bully you to get additional workbooks, when the fact is, many people get additional workbooks for additional children anyway. No need to try and force me.

 

I am most likely keeping it and I appreciate the educational value of the curriculum, but if I had understood the stipulation before purchase, I would not have bought it. I just don't appreciate the feeling that it's hanging over my head; I feel like I'm subjugated to someone regarding the use of the curriculum and not free to just use it and enjoy it.

[Ginevra]

I meant for this to be in the High School/Self-Education Forum. So silly I didn't realize I posted it here.

[KristenS]

I think the fact that it contains DVD and CD material changes the rules a bit on the copyright. Videos always come with licensing notices and warnings not to use for public viewings, etc etc. And the request to purchase a new student workbook for each student is not the same as buying the entire kit over and over again.

 

I guess, though, since they require a 'forum registration' with each workbook purchase, it's possible for them to track when their stuff is sold secondhand. How crazy. They ought to be glad people like it enough to share it, and settle for selling the consumable workbooks.

[Ginevra]

I guess, though, since they require a 'forum registration' with each workbook purchase, it's possible for them to track when their stuff is sold secondhand. How crazy. They ought to be glad people like it enough to share it, and settle for selling the consumable workbooks.

 

Yes, but it doesn't appear that registering with the forum is necessary, just that it is an added perk of the program (assuming it's a good forum). So, that's one thing that is weird about it to me.

 

I do think they are cutting off their nose to spite their face. In looking at the curriculum a little yesterday, it does seem to be quite good, perhaps outstanding. The only thing keeping me from singing it's praises far and wide (the way I am, say, with Life of Fred) is this idiotic license thing. :glare: IMO, they would stand a better chance of reaping word-of-mouth benefits (which are HUGE in homeschooling communities!) if they would just act normally about sales and distribution.

[KinderSafari]

This is the same laws that apply to Rosetta Stone languages. Rosetta Stone has some set up that it may not be re-sold, and ebay will pull a listing of any used RS curriculum on its site.

Rosetta Stone must be registered and the CD in your drive in order for it to work. Another user will not be able to get it to work.

 

I understand the logic because what's to prevent the DVDs to get passed between homeschool groups and people would never need to purchase the item.

 

But isn't it the same as music licenses to DVDs and to songs?

 

If you buy music, you are allowed to share and sell the original CD, but not make copies.

[Ginevra]

I understand the logic because what's to prevent the DVDs to get passed between homeschool groups and people would never need to purchase the item.

 

But isn't it the same as music licenses to DVDs and to songs?

 

If you buy music, you are allowed to share and sell the original CD, but not make copies.

 

It's actually not the same logic. My math program, MUS, for example, has a DVD, a teacher manual, a test booklet and a student text. Theoretically, I could just not write in the textbook, watch the DVD, learn the material and then sell or lend brand-new books around to friends, who would never need to purchase their own MUS materials....but in reality, this is not (usually) what people do. Most people are willing to buy the curriculum they need, use it for the length of time needed, buy new workbooks if needed for younger kids in the family, and then sell the DVD and TM when they are done (or give it away). The MUS company does not appear to be suffering without hanging silly "license agreements" on their materials so they can brow-beat people into buying new workbooks for new students. Using the materials over time within your own family is not the same as pirating copies for sale. It is also not the same as supposedly being forbidden from selling the item when you have finished with it. I could sell you my Twisted Sister album for five dollars if you want it :D and it would not be violating licensing agreements.

 

I bought RS used, It works just fine. Making a copy of media and selling it is wrong and illegal. Selling media that you no longer need is legal no matter what the producer of such media tries to tell you.

 

The case I mentioned in my earlier post was in regards to software. I can't find it on-line right now. Basically a guy was selling used copies of software and the publisher sued him saying that he couldn't re-sell because it was "leased". The judge disagreed with the publisher and found in favor of the seller. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.....

 

Thanks for that, Cadam.