selling website with photopost pro?

ncg · September 16th, 2006, 11:07 AM

i want to sell my website that has photopost pro, what do i need to do to be able to do this and give the new owner photopost legally as part of the sale?

camel · September 16th, 2006, 11:09 AM

As per my knowledge, PP Lic is non transferable. New owner will have to buy a new lic and you will have to keep your lic with you

Chuck S · September 16th, 2006, 11:19 AM

http://www.photopost.com/phplicense.html

This should explain the license policies

ncg · September 16th, 2006, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck S

http://www.photopost.com/phplicense.html

This should explain the license policies

as i understand it, i can sell them the database and its contents, i just cant give them the script to access it, they have to buy that on their own , is that right?

Chuck S · September 16th, 2006, 01:51 PM

Correct your site contents are yours to give or sell you just can not sell them the software since that is not transferable.

ncg · September 16th, 2006, 02:06 PM

thanks.

Sola · September 16th, 2006, 08:40 PM

So, why isn't the license transferable again? Should make for good education.

Chuck S · September 16th, 2006, 08:49 PM

I dont know anything about it being an education.

The license is non transferable because that is what the license agreement states and always has stated. Anyone who purchases a license agrees to this license as the order page states when you purchase. This is the policy of the company. I do not set the policies I just answer the questions

Sola · September 17th, 2006, 12:18 AM

Ah, Chuck and his occasional slip-outta-the-noose responses!

It is well. Just kidding around.

mjm · September 17th, 2006, 01:54 AM

Add/include the cost of a new lic to the websites' purchase price, made payable to PhotoPost and transfer the data to their lic (?)

Just curious, I have not desire to sell my site

Bill Thebert · November 9th, 2006, 08:15 PM

If "XYZ Corporation" bought and owns a software license, and "XYZ Corp" is sold -- then the license goes with it, along with all other assets (and liabilities) of the corporation.

"XYZ Corp" owned the license when first purchased, and "XYZ Corp" CONTINUES to own the license. Nothing has changed. Nothing is being "transferred".

Corporations are "virtual persons" who can act, enter agreements, hold title to property, etc.

Chuck S · November 9th, 2006, 08:32 PM

Licenses are registered in a real persons name here at Photopost not corporate entities hense as our License states they are none transferable.

Bill Thebert · November 10th, 2006, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck S

Licenses are registered in a real persons name here at Photopost not corporate entities hense as our License states they are none transferable.

I would invite you to reconsider this interpretation of your license agreement.

I can accept it if you wish to make your licenses non-transferrable. That's your right, and in some respects it's reasonable.

But I own multiple PhotoPost Pro licenses myself, and I have been an "influencer" in the purchase of several dozen more. All have been for clubs, churches, alumni associations & other such "organizational entities" who believe (apparently falsely) that the ORGANIZATION owns the software that the ORGANIZATION purchased and paid for.

None of these organizations have any intention of transferring their licenses. But officers, presidents, treasurers, webmasters, etc., come and go.

If you're seriously saying that ALL of these organizations need to re-purchase their software licenses every time they get a new webmaster, a new treasurer, etc. . . . well, that's just absurd. The club bought the software license; the club implemented it. It resides on the club's domain, which remains unchanged. PERSONNEL within the club/association may change over time, but the same entity owns and is using your product.

I'm having a hard time believing that you're serious when you say that only INDIVIDUAL PERSONS may license your product. But if you are, then I need to know this. Because I will be unable to recommend this product any longer if this is true.

If GENERAL MOTORS wanted to purchase 200 PhotoPost licenses, you wouldn't sell them? You'd insist on the NAMES of 200 separate INDIVIDUALS? And you would insist that these INDIVIDUALS owned the licenses, and not GM? Ridiculous. Very bush league.

P.S. -- NOWHERE in this license agreement does it state that a "customer" or a "licensee" must be an INDIVIDUAL PERSON rather than a club, church, neighborhood or alumni association, corporation, etc. In fact you specifically imply that COMPANIES may own PhotoPost licenses:

Quote:

Your acceptance of this agreement also permits All Enthusiast, Inc. to list your company and/or domain in promotional materials . . .

ScottW · November 10th, 2006, 07:06 PM

We license photopost to individual entities. This can be a person, a corporation, an organization, etc. The license is non-transferrable between entities. Examples:

John owns a PhotoPost license that he is using on cartalk.com. He no longer wishes to use PhotoPost on his site and he wants to sell his license to Bill who owns Mootown.com. This transfer is not allowed. Bill cannot buy a PhotoPost license from John. He must buy it from photopost.com.

John owns a PhotoPost license that he is using on cartalk.com. Bill wants to buy the cartalk.com website, so John decides to include his PhotoPost license as part of the site sale. This transfer is not allowed. Bill needs to purchase a new license from PhotoPost.com.

If a license is in your name, it stays with you. If a license is in your company's name, it stays with your company. Again, the license is not transferrable.

The purpose of this is not to make your life difficult. Rather, it is to prevent people from selling multiple copies of PhotoPost. It is not a physical product like a car, which can only be sold once. A person could decide to try to resell their PhotoPost license to 50 people, if they wanted. Also, it isn't possible for us to track who owns what license unless the license holder purchased the license directly from us.

Bill Thebert · November 12th, 2006, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottW

We license photopost to individual entities. This can be a person, a corporation, an organization, etc. The license is non-transferrable between entities.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottW

John owns a PhotoPost license that he is using on cartalk.com. Bill wants to buy the cartalk.com website, so John decides to include his PhotoPost license as part of the site sale. This transfer is not allowed. Bill needs to purchase a new license from PhotoPost.com.

Thanks for stepping in to clarify, Scott. But I'm still having difficulty reconciling these two statements above. I'm not looking to quibble, but I can't imagine selling a "web site" alone, all by itself -- without selling the organization/company/entity that owns and operates said web site (and any associated revenue stream).

My amplification of your hypothetical:

John owns "CarTalk, LTD", a media company that owns & operates the cartalk.com domain. John purchased a PhotoPost license, indicating that cartalk.com was the domain on which the license would be used. When John made the purchase, he listed his personal e-mail address (john@cartalk.com), and paid using a company credit card that bore his personal/individual name (which he therefore entered accurately on your online order form). Or maybe he used a personal credit card, but the COMPANY reimbursed him for the purchase on his expense account.

Either way, the COMPANY purchased the license for the COMPANY's purposes and use.

John sells "CarTalk, LTD" to Bill. Included in the sale is the domain, the server on which the web site is running, the Windows OS *on* that server, the web site content, the furniture, the accounts receivable, etc.

The office lease, phone service, electrical service, heating oil supply contract, etc., are all in the name of "CarTalk, LTD" and continue uninterrupted under the new ownership. The ownership of the company has changed hands, but all the company's contracts and obligations continue on unaffected by the ownership transfer.

From your first quote above, Scott, I have to assume that the license stays with the now-sold company.

I absolutely understand that you don't want "CarTalk, LTD" selling its PhotoPost license to some other outfit, such as "TractorChat, Inc". No clarification needed there.

ScottW · November 12th, 2006, 03:05 PM

Most PhotoPost licenses are held by individual persons, in which case it is simple to understand that the license cannot be sold or transferred from that individual to another individual or from that individual to a company. Nor can that individual continue to own the license and simply sublease it out to an individual or company (for instance, if the seller were to sell their entire website and then allow the new owner to operate the seller's license of PhotoPost without buying their own). And since slavery was abolished, a buyer can't buy an individual person.

In the case of a company, companies sell individual websites all the time. Websites are simply assets, like a copy machine, that can be sold individually without selling the entire company. Again, the license stays with the company, not the website. If a company sells a website to a buying entity, the buying entity would need a new license to use PhotoPost on that website.

If a corporation, recognized as a legal entity, sells its entire assets and that entity continues to exist under new ownership, then the new buyer wouldn't need a new license, since the license holder (the corporate entity) didn't change. But if the buyer dissolves the old entity and/or merges its assets into the buying entity, then the buyer would have effectively killed the PhotoPost license holder and would need to buy a new license. This only applies to legally recognized and properly registered entities (corporations: C Corps, S Corps, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation) not sole proprietorships or other make-believe or self-proclaimed organizations that are not legally recognized as a corporate entity.

Sybaris · November 13th, 2006, 03:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottW

Nor can that individual continue to own the license and simply sublease it out to an individual or company (for instance, if the seller were to sell their entire website and then allow the new owner to operate the seller's license of PhotoPost without buying their own).

Of course they can, the person who owns the license can point the license at whatever web site domain name they please and use it there, They don't have to own the domain name or anything do they.

Bill Thebert · November 15th, 2006, 06:54 PM

Very well then, Scott.

Thank you for your time and your input.

While I believe and maintain that there are plenty of unincorporated organizations/entities that are far from "make-believe" (e.g., neighborhood associations, alumni associations, motorcycle and 4x4 clubs, etc.), it's your opinion that matters.

You've made it abundantly clear that you do not wish these sorts of organizations to purchase PhotoPost, and I will not recommend it against your wishes.

It would be foolish and impractical for such unincorporated organizations to re-purchase their software licenses every time their leadership or personnel change.

Let us know if you should ever change your mind.