|
I think the important issue here is that content providers can't have their cake and eat it.
If they're selling a non-transferable licence to read, view or listen to a certain piece of material, then fine, that's what they're selling, and they have a right to decide what they want to sell. But if what I'm buying is a licence rather than a particular copy of a work, then I own that licence and can exercise it however I choose. And that means I have the right to shift the format. If I buy a book in epub format for my Sony, and then later decide to get a Kindle, then I have the right to change the format to one which the new device can use.
If 'intellectual property' is subject to the same protections as real property (an idea to which I do not wholly subscribe), then my licence to consume a work is property as well, and measures which prevent me from exercising that licence are an infringement on my property rights.
So basically they need to make a choice:
If they're selling a particular copy of a work, then all I'm buying is that copy, I can't modify it, and if I want a different type of copy then I have to buy another one. But I can sell it to someone else, because the provider's rights to control the sale of that copy have been exhausted.
If they're selling a non-transferable licence, then that licence applies only to me, and can't be assigned to someone else, so I can't sell it. But I can exercise that licence as I want for my personal enjoyment (so no public performances etc), which means I can shift the format as much as necessary.
|