Maryland Ebook Licensing Law Ruled Unconstitutional

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Not quite right. The First Sale Doctrine allows for library lending, video rentals, selling or giving away, etc.

A brief Googling of some legal sites suggests this is correct, which really surprises me.

So...why did so many of the video stores I've encountered have not-for resale, and rental editions of DVD and tapes? They sure weren't any more durable, like library-bound books are. How did Disney win their suits over people displaying their DVD movies at public events? And why don't libraries just stock their shelves from used books stores? Were astrangerhere's MLS classes just a scam?

[John F]

Originally Posted by ApK

A brief Googling of some legal sites suggests this is correct, which really surprises me.

So...why did so many of the video stores I've encountered have not-for resale, and rental editions of DVD and tapes? They sure weren't any more durable, like library-bound books are. How did Disney win their suits over people displaying their DVD movies at public events? And why don't libraries just stock their shelves from used books stores? Were astrangerhere's MLS classes just a scam?

I believe some DVDs can be purchased cheaper if they agree that they are for rental only (companies that want to buy in bulk).

I know that my library buys some of their DVD's from Amazon. And I believe that library books are similar. I believe in the past, there have been posts about libraries paying extra for a "library binding".

[John F]

And I remember one of the local mom and pop dvd rental places going to a local retailer (Best Buy) to purchase DVDs on release day.

[Little.Egret]

I recently read complaints by librarians in the Irish Republic to much the same effect as those in the US. They of course can ask for a remedy without being troubled by Federal preemption of copyright law though there is still the Irish constitution, EU law, and what passes as a European Bill of Rights (the ECHR).

[hobnail]

Originally Posted by ApK

How did Disney win their suits over people displaying their DVD movies at public events?

Back in the early days of mp3s and people ripping and sharing their mp3s they didn't realize that the copyright laws forbade that; they thought that when they bought a cd that they owned the music on it. Then the RIAA started suing people. While all that brouhaha was going on I heard a piece on the local public radio about how music couldn't be played in a public setting without paying the artist royalties. It sounded like the RIAA put itself between the people paying these royalties, i.e., they collected them, and the musicians, who they gave a percentage to. So when you listen to the radio, the radio station is paying royalties each time they play something. So in theory if a restaurant plays some cds for background music they should be paying the RIAA.

So you can probably see how that extends to videos.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by John F

I believe some DVDs can be purchased cheaper if they agree that they are for rental only (companies that want to buy in bulk).

Historically in Ireland and UK the Video Rental library had to pay x4 to x10 for VHS or DVD than retail. I think almost all closed now.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Not quite right. The First Sale Doctrine allows for library lending, video rentals, selling or giving away, etc. There are quite a few court cases that have allowed all those activities. It's even been used to cover grey market imports (for instance, a couple of cases have allowed textbooks printed in other countries by an American publisher to be imported and sold without infringing on the copyright).

In that I don't live in the USA, and I'm not a lawyer, I'm no expert on USA Law, which despite what some think, only applies in the USA, or in some cases (according to the USA) to USA citizens overseas unless they renounce citizenship. So of course I may be wrong. However some aspects of USA laws break international treaties and laws.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by hobnail

So you can probably see how that extends to videos.

No I cannot. Because, 1, music has specific exceptions carved in first sale law, and 2, mp3s are a licenced digital transfer, which is not as clearly covered under first sale, while dvds are a copy on a piece of purchased physical media, which clearly IS what first sale is about. So, no, not the same, and I'm still confused.
But this is probably too much of digression for this thread, which is about ebooks license terms.
I'll need to find an IP lawyer.

[Sunshinydays]

My question from the articles is why libraries are being charged more than others with a similar license?

I am assuming it's because the potential number of people who could access a ebook is so high, but most books probably have a fairly niche audience or none at all.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by Sunshinydays

My question from the articles is why libraries are being charged more than others with a similar license?

I am assuming it's because the potential number of people who could access a ebook is so high, but most books probably have a fairly niche audience or none at all.

They pay more to make up for the lost profit of those who don’t buy the book because they can read it for free.

[Quoth]

Also Libraries in the USA don't work the same way as UK or Ireland libraries in terms of the small per loan royalty (I think zero in USA).

[Little.Egret]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Also Libraries in the USA don't work the same way as UK or Ireland libraries in terms of the small per loan royalty (I think zero in USA).

!Macmillan etc have the same business model on both sides of the pond and libraries pay accordingly.

The PLR (Public Lending Right) payment to Authors usually doesn't come from local libraries.

https://plrinternational.com/public/...sLDh46bWOg.pdf

[haertig]

Originally Posted by Quoth

They are, but they can't just buy a regular retail copy. They have to pay a library price and often other licenses.

Not recently, but in years past I have donated books to libraries. They were gladly accepted. Never once did I donate anything other than a "regular retail copy". And never once did the library ask me how I had acquired the book, what license I had, how much I had paid, etc.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by haertig

Not recently, but in years past I have donated books to libraries. They were gladly accepted. Never once did I donate anything other than a "regular retail copy". And never once did the library ask me how I had acquired the book, what license I had, how much I had paid, etc.

The whole first sale discussion above has me second guessing the whole matter, HOWEVER, IF IT IS TRUE that libraries have to pay for the license to lend, even if that license is paid for in the cost of a library edition of the book, it doesn't mean the license is bound to only that physical copy.
If they have right to lend x number copies, say, and some books are lost or damaged, surely they can replace the paper item with any other from any source.

As I say, I'm questioning now whether the premise is true, but IF it is, obtaining retail or donated copies of stuff that they already license would still be consistent. Indeed, when we've had to replace a lost or damaged library book, it didn't strike me as odd that we could obtain the replacement from any source.

[catsknit]

Originally Posted by haertig

Not recently, but in years past I have donated books to libraries. They were gladly accepted. Never once did I donate anything other than a "regular retail copy". And never once did the library ask me how I had acquired the book, what license I had, how much I had paid, etc.

Sometimes those donated books may just go to the library's yearly used book sale, to generate funds to purchase new books. Not sure how much that happens but I know our library has a huge yearly sale and it includes not only books they are getting rid of but also a lot which are donated by the public.