I don't know about you, but my CRAP-O-METER alarm went off like an old time "ahhoogah horn."
Because we have no control over the length of time that the license is in force, the proper term for the arrangement is a possessory license--the right to keep and use the property.PEP can revoke their "license" whenever they want for a number of different reasons.
Here's an example of how they can do this:
Their contract says that they can revoke their license if the licensee does anything "illegal." Well guess what? Their license also indemnifies PEP for any legal action against a licensee by a "third party rights holder" (like a publisher) if they didn't get "all the permissions needed to perform in a commercial environment."
Remember Harrington saying more than once; "Our permission is sufficient, but it may not be enough"
because a KJ could still be sued by a publisher or writer etc... And their contract specifically indemnifies them in the specific case of "infringement."
Which even PEP will tell you is a "no-no."Now, connect the dots:
Guess what? In order for a Gem "licensee" or H.E.L.P. licensee to get any value from the license they sign (i.e. the "covenant not to sue") requires that they commit copyright infringement in the process of exercising their "rights" under the contract.
Committing copyright infringement is a violation of the copyright laws - and that's not legal... Just ask Harrington.
So they can yank their "license/lease" whenever they want. Why do you think they settled with EMI if what they were doing was perfectly legal?Read the contract yourself.
#1. A "lease" requires "property" (like land, or a car etc. )
#2. A "license" does not require property. (Like a "license to display
Under the law, a license agreement that smells, feels, or tastes like a lease will be construed as a lease no matter what it is titled. Conversely, a document titled “lease agreement” but containing all the characteristics and attributes of a license agreement will be construed as a license.