[BoldlyDubious]

I agree with Anjohl.
When you buy downloaded digital media (from Amazon and most of its competitors), your continued possibility to access such media in the future depends on the vendor's benevolence, and on the efficacy of its fraud-detecting algorithms. (Not considering the continued existence of the company, which cannot be taken for granted.)
This is how things (mostly) are today, and I think it's unacceptable.

Saying "But there are means to circumvent DRM and make your downloads really yours", as many posts in this thread do, is not an acceptable solution. Even where/when this is legal, it requires technical knowledge and tools that the casual user may not possess. Such user, today, is probably not even aware of the existence of this problem: i.e. that she/he bought a license and not a piece of media.

State law should ensure that property rights associated to the property of digital media are the same of physical media. If a media vendor wants to continue selling licenses instead of property rights, that's perfectly OK: but the law should specify that the vendor cannot use the word "buy" anywhere in relation to this transaction, except in the form "buy a license". In this way, even the casual user will be fully aware of what she/he's actually purchasing.