Quote:
Originally Posted by riemann42
I am mildly offended that my position is categorized as being in favor of Big Media. I am in favor of a legal framework that encouraged authors and artists to participate in a system to insure that they are compensated.
|
I look at the implications of changes, rather than just the wording of the changes.
The right to remove DRM for personal use is not something you specifically mentioned, and it'd be a different right to that simply for format shifting and so on.
Quote:
|
As food for thought, here are the terms of use at Fictionwise:
|
Not worth the electrons used to display that under EU law. EU law is quite clear on the point that Fictionwise are selling the books (since that is how they are presented, as sales), and
all a user's normal rights, including that of exhaustion doctrine (and hence resale), apply.
More, that agreement breaches the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, sample terms 2.3.2, 2.8.3, 14.2.1, 17.1, 18.3.1, 18.4.1, 18.6.1, 18.8.1, 18.8.2, 18.8.3, 19.1, 19.3, 19.5, 19.6, 19.7, 19.9, 19.10, 19.12, 19.14 and potentially 6.1.2.
(Darn, it breaches a LOT for covering such a narrow area, lmao - although 95%+ of contracts fail the 19.x segments about Plain English)
Quote:
|
If you disagree with the above terms, agreed to at time of sale, I encourage you to file a lawsuit and nullify these terms.
|
Don't need to. The law's clear. If Fictionwise tried to sue an EU citizen for breach, the case would be tossed in a heartbeat (If the IP owner brought a civil IP case, that might be considered, but that EULA is trashcan material).
Note that the text on the "add to cart" button is "ready to buy?", this would almost certainly (it has quite a few precedents) be held to be the controlling text as regards sale vs licence.