Ownership in the Digital Age

[BeccaPrice]

Dear Author does it again - posts about law cases and trends that have implications beyond what we'd normally be concerned with.

If we don't have right of resale on digital items, then we don't truly own them. And if we're only leasing them, why are we paying full price for them?

[kennyc]

Yes those are the two main issues and have been from the beginning from what I see. Of course I come from a software background where these have been issues for a while.

Thanks for the thread and the link!

[crich70]

A good point there. When I buy something I expect to own it not lease it and you have to wonder what's next.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Yes those are the two main issues and have been from the beginning from what I see. Of course I come from a software background where these have been issues for a while.

Thanks for the thread and the link!

If you purchase software that comes on some sort of physical medium such as a CD, you are allowed to resell. But if it's a download and you have no physical medium, you don't have the right to resell. Same exact program, but one has physical medium and the other does not.

What I think would work is if you bought an eBook from say BooksOnBoard and you wanted to sell that eBook, if you sold it, then that eBook would be removed from your account and placed in the account of the person buying it. That way, you'd have no access to download it again. That would mean that you can only sell to people with an account on the same site and that georestrcitions are not an issue.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by crich70

A good point there. When I buy something I expect to own it not lease it and you have to wonder what's next.

One issue is the sites themselves. If we are not buying and getting ownership, then the link that says BUY NOW is wrong and misleading/

[crich70]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Yes those are the two main issues and have been from the beginning from what I see. Of course I come from a software background where these have been issues for a while.

Thanks for the thread and the link!

I've always thought of software and text as being two different things myself. When I buy a computer program I know that I don't have the right to decompile it and sell copies of my version to others. In fact when installing a program I'm asked if I accept the terms of the programs makers or not. There isn't that same kind of thing in traditional books. Or at least it isn't as visible. There is still copyright, but the publisher has never had the right to take back my copy of a book in the past. For that matter the only thing software makers have done in the past is to stop supporting the version of a program that I have. I still had it in the physical sense. Ebooks are having a good set of pains, both birthing and growing and I don't imagine they will be done any time soon.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

One issue is the sites themselves. If we are not buying and getting ownership, then the link that says BUY NOW is wrong and misleading/

It's also wrong to sell books on two different sites that both use mobi format and have things set up so books bought at one can't be read on the ereader you sell. I have that problem with them. Several books I bought can't be fixed so I can read them on my Kindle. And Amazon has owned Mobipocket for enough yrs for that not have to be an issue.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by crich70

It's also wrong to sell books on two different sites that both use mobi format and have things set up so books bought at one can't be read on the ereader you sell. I have that problem with them. Several books I bought can't be fixed so I can read them on my Kindle. And Amazon has owned Mobipocket for enough yrs for that not have to be an issue.

If you know the PID for those old Mobipocket eBooks, then the DRM should be able to be removed.

[MikeB1972]

On the plus side Bruce Willis is planning on suing aPple for the rights to leave his music collection to his children, so we may finally see a case come to court about digital rights.

[pagansoul]

I don't buy an ebook to resell or pass on to my family. I used ebooks like I used to do with paperbacks without giving them to a library or Goodwill. If I really like a book and think it's worth the space I buy it. I have many art, decorating, cook, travel books in my physical library. I also have a CD, DVD, Blu-ray collection of my favorites but also make hard copies of purchased digital music and movies.

[JoeD]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

If you purchase software that comes on some sort of physical medium such as a CD, you are allowed to resell. But if it's a download and you have no physical medium, you don't have the right to resell. Same exact program, but one has physical medium and the other does not.

That's changed in the EU. The courts have decided if you purchase digital software such as games and apps, then the developer/publishers cannot stop you reselling that software even via an EULA.

In practice, how that will work I'm not sure. When you consider many games and apps are now tied to an account and include DRM, unless the devs/publishers are obliged to provide a way to transfer ownership it could be a toothless ruling.

Sure you can resell it, but the person you're selling it to can't use it with potentially breaking the law by removing DRM and assuming it's not dependant on an online service tied to an account.

I hope it becomes a requirement for any company that sells digitally to provide an authorised way to transfer licenses. I doubt they'll be quick to do so without a requirement to do it though.

Even without that ruling though, I have always thought that whoever is named in a will for receipt of all your physical property should also be provided an equal share of your digital items. Of course, it's one of those issues that's much easier said than done.

[RainingLemur]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

On the plus side Bruce Willis is planning on suing aPple for the rights to leave his music collection to his children, so we may finally see a case come to court about digital rights.

Yeah, I had read about this earlier. And, I wonder just how that is going to play out. I can see there being some concessions to being able to give the collection to his kids (through some kind of merging of the iTunes accounts, or something), but I think it's going to take some serious pushing to get there.

Either that, or Apple (wanting to negate some of the poor lawsuit karma they've gotten recently) will be a little flexible here. But, I don't see that happening, personally.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by JoeD

That's changed in the EU. The courts have decided if you purchase digital software such as games and apps, then the developer/publishers cannot stop you reselling that software even via an EULA.

In practice, how that will work I'm not sure. When you consider many games and apps are now tied to an account and include DRM, unless the devs/publishers are obliged to provide a way to transfer ownership it could be a toothless ruling.

Sure you can resell it, but the person you're selling it to can't use it with potentially breaking the law by removing DRM and assuming it's not dependant on an online service tied to an account.

I hope it becomes a requirement for any company that sells digitally to provide an authorised way to transfer licenses. I doubt they'll be quick to do so without a requirement to do it though.

Even without that ruling though, I have always thought that whoever is named in a will for receipt of all your physical property should also be provided an equal share of your digital items. Of course, it's one of those issues that's much easier said than done.

The trick is, is a license that restricts resale enforceable. The answer is, not always, or, more realistically, we don't know because it hasn't gotten to the Supreme Court yet.

The legal question is, is the sale of an ebook, or mp3, or whatever, a license or a sale of goods. What it says in the license may or may not matter. Click-wrap licenses have been enforced, but not always. In Softman v. Adobe, the court ruled that (despite the click-wrap license), because there was a one time payment that gave indefinite use (rather than for a limited time), it was a "sale of goods," and therefore, the first sale doctrine applied. Other districts have ruled otherwise, and so far, nobody seems eager to get it to the Supreme Court to get it resolved for good.

[david_e]

.....

[kennyc]

Is there an echo in here?