Quote:
Originally Posted by khalleron
I have to disagree - if the theory is that you're sold, not a book, but a license, then the publisher IS obligated to provide free replacements. Or should be, anyway.
|
These are the two poles that everyone seems to fixate on, sometimes taking contrary positions depending on how the question is framed. This is why I believe that IP law is incoherent. When you get different answers to the same question depending on how it is framed, something is wrong.
My own belief is that digital content itself is neither bought nor licensed. What is bought or licensed is convenient access to the content, which may or may not include continued access or other access services like backup. And I also believe that once you have access, the provider cannot restrict what you do with that access so long as you do not provide access to anyone else who has not himself bought access.
I'm not saying that this is the law, because it isn't. But I do think that it is the economic and physical reality of the situation, and that eventually the law will catch up to it, unless the providers can keep it from happening. And I also think that ethical behavior should be premised on reality, not the law, at least to the extent that the law gets out of sync with reality.