John Dyke

Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
john smith wrote:

From my vantage point this looks like simple greed on the
part of Mr. Dyke for the sale of another set of drawings.

Am I missing something? Has anybody actually seen this
notion applied as a legal precedent in the past?

Who is being greedy here?
What prevents the plans from being resold indefinitely each time the
possessor dies and the estate tries to make money off from the sale?
Mr Dyke owns the rights to the plans. If someone wants to buy a set of
plans and build the aircraft, they should be purchasing the plans from
Mr Dyke, not an estate of someone who had purchased a set of plans from
Mr Dyke.

What is it, in your mind, that differentiates a set of airplane plans
from anything else in the world that might be sold second-hand? What
should the inheritor of a set of plans he has no intention of using do
with them? Throw them away? Return them to Mr. Dyke so that he can sell
them twice?

Warranties on new merchandise often come with the "original purchaser"
limitation. If Mr. Dyke wants to offer technical support only to the
original purchaser, he is within his legal rights to do so. I still
maintain that he is being small by doing so. Who cares whether the plans
change hands 100 times? He sells one set of plans, he eventually offers
one real builder technical support.

Sorry, but I would have to disagree with you on this. If, as the
purchaser of the plans you want the technical support of the designer,
you should purchase those plans from the designer and pay the price for
that support. The only reason for purchasing them otherwise is to try
and essentially get something for nothing. Mr. Dyke doesn't owe you,
the second, third, or whatever down the line anything and potientially
would have to answer the same questions over and over again not to
mention having to try and keep up with who now rightfully owns the
plans.

As the inheritor of a set of plans, you can keep them, throw them away
or sell them but you have not right to expect that whatever action you
take should imply any liability on a third party, in this case Mr.
Dyke.