Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy
The courts have essentially said "you can't have it both ways". You need to make it clear at the time of sale that this is a limited license and the customer does not own the product, or else your "license" terms will not hold. None of the eBook retailers I've seen do this. Terms in the fine print of an agreement claiming this is a license do not count, as far as the courts are concerned. If the shop makes the customer think they are buying the product, that is what counts. It's not illegal for them to put such terms in there, but they won't hold up.
Retailers can not make you think you own the product when you hand over your money, and then try to claim that you don't really own it afterwards because of the fine print of something you clicked on when you signed up for an account. This is what they are trying to do though.
|
Agreed.
The current situation is e-books are a small niche, so the issue hasn't gotten before courts yet. When
it does, they'll probably put the same restrictions they have on software--that if they want to do it that way, they have to be upfront that you're buying a license to read the book on machines tied to your account. Not buying the file to own. That or they just scrap DRM as a result of the ruling.