Quote:
Originally Posted by AprilHare
Your thesis is flawed. You own the package (the digital storage media) and you can sell the storage media if you so wish. They are not separate. Even if they are separable (pulping books, for instance) requiring it of an owner is a violation of first sale doctorine.
|
But I think the question would be, if the package you purchased hard "serialized" DRM, where the package was only viewable on the eReader you originally opened it on/purchased it for, then legally, you could not sell that package later on.
I have no idea if anyone has implemented a DRM scheme in this manner, I doubt it would be in general use because you'd have to assume that ALL readers were following some form of standard to allow for a DRM that could operate across Sony, Nook, Kindle, etc. and extract/indentify a serial number.
Granted a DRM scheme like that would be fairly easy to unlock, but if you later sold the "unlocked" copy, you'd be in violation of copy right, as you've sold an ALTERED, beyond standard "wear and tear", package.
Anyway I think it really comes down to the saying:
"Locks aren't meant to keep criminals out, they're supposed to keep the honest people out."
So DRM really doesn't do anything to deter someone who intends to break the copy right anyway, it's really just there to make it so difficult it keeps all us non-criminals from doing it.
Copy right laws really don't prevent criminal activity, they're just there to make everyone else's lives miserable if they get caught breaking them.