Terms of Use prohibiting reselling of ebooks are legal German Court rules

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by doubleshuffle

Indeed it is. Here's the list.

I wonder what goes to the authors from those taxes.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

And how it is that despite the format allowing more freedom, the consumers have fewer rights with digital content?

Why despite? Because the digital format makes it easier to create large numbers of perfect copies, similar rights would create dissimilar threats to respect of copyright.

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

I wonder what goes to the authors from those taxes.

This apparently explains it, except that I don't know German:

http://www.vgwort.de/auszahlungen.html

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Why despite? Because the digital format makes it easier to create large numbers of perfect copies, similar rights would create dissimilar threats to respect of copyright.




This apparently explains it, except that I don't know German:

http://www.vgwort.de/auszahlungen.html

In doesn't get into too much detail, but it goes something like everybody that is elegible gets part of the pot. Based on a formular either sold or existing copies - the exact formular slipped by me skimming the information. Distribution goes 70% creator 30% publisher for inprint and 100% creator for out of print. Interesting is that there is income tax payable for getting paid as well as sales tax when purchasing. The distribution appears to adjust monthly. Not sure how useful google translate would be, as most details are in the linked pdf files. Company that takes care of all appears to work non-profit, but operation cost gets paid out of the pot.

[mandy314]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

...
Because the digital format makes it easier to create large numbers of perfect copies, similar rights would create dissimilar threats to respect of copyright.
...

Well put argument.

But don't we have real threats to respect of copyright? The new bestseller for free - never away more than a dirty dozen of klicks and touches from your device. Sharing and trading among family and friends. Completely illegal of course and no respect for piracy from my side.

A legal used ebook market wouldn't change the situation dramatically imho. A market for used Kindle books by Amazon or used Kobo books by Kobo with the sold book being removed from the cloud/shelf and all devices/apps of the seller should work. Lending of ebooks works in a kind of way already.

And the prizes. Who would buy a "first edition" (sic) ebook for $15 if a used copy is available for $10 shortly after release? How will the numbers add up after all - I don't know. I'm far from sure that every potential buyer of used new released ebooks would find a seller who must have bought the book in the first place. Even with paperback-prized ebooks I really wouldn't expect a large second-hand market.

I'm afraid I still can't see why customers who don't break (copyright) laws and shouldn't be seen summarily as potential law breakers can't sell their ebooks. The (unspecified) potential threat to respect of copyright isn't enough for prohibiting re-selling in my book.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Why despite? Because the digital format makes it easier to create large numbers of perfect copies, similar rights would create dissimilar threats to respect of copyright.

[sarcasm]Because we all know how the Harry Potter books were under a lower threat of copyright infringement because they were not published as ebooks. And few wanted the imperfect copies of paper books.[/sarcasm]

Whether it is illegal copies of paper books or illegal copies of ebooks, we are still talking about illegal activities. Why should that affect people that don't do illegal things to the book that they bought?

[beachwanderer]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Company that takes care of all appears to work non-profit, but operation cost gets paid out of the pot.

The VG Wort is an incorporated society (rather than a company) that is under legal supervision of the German Patent Office (quite a unique construction, dating from 1958).

According to their own publications (pdf), the operational costs and overhead amounted to 10,2 Mio EUR in 2012 which equals 9,3 % of revenue from within Germany, amounting to 115,35 Mio EUR in 2012. The fact that the split of the operational costs is not fully transparent is, well, frequently criticized (the salary of the board members is not made public).

There is a court case pending which still has to be decided by the Bundesgerichtshof (highest federal civil court) about the way the gains are split between the about 460.000 authors and 12.000 publishers who are represented by the VG Wort. The plaintiff argues that the publishers receive massive sums which rather have to be divided between the authors. Lower courts have returned decisions in favour of this view (see press release by OLG München 2013 (pdf)).

[mandy314]

@beachwanderer
Thank you for the information and the links.

For those who want to have a closer look at the court decision discussed and some central principles of law (immaterial goods) involved:

Ruling of OLG Hamm 15. Mai 2014 · Az. 22 U 60/13 (German)
http://openjur.de/u/692344.html
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erschöpfungsgrundsatz

Most of it is way above my head. One line of argument for validating the clause prohibiting re-selling seems to be that the ebook "owner" must copy the book to sell it (like sending it via email to the buyer and AFTER THAT deleting the own file). Copying the content is illegal, so re-selling can't be possible . The court sees the Terms Of Use clause even as consumer-friendly it prohibiting to do something which would be illegal.

... Oh, come on ...

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by mandy314

@beachwanderer
Thank you for the information and the links.

For those who want to have a closer look at the court decision discussed and some central principles of law (immaterial goods) involved:

Ruling of OLG Hamm 15. Mai 2014 · Az. 22 U 60/13 (German)
http://openjur.de/u/692344.html
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erschöpfungsgrundsatz

Most of it is way above my head. One line of argument for validating the clause prohibiting re-selling seems to be that the ebook "owner" must copy the book to sell it (like sending it via email to the buyer and AFTER THAT deleting the own file). Copying the content is illegal, so re-selling can't be possible . The court sees the Terms Of Use clause even as consumer-friendly it prohibiting to do something which would be illegal.

... Oh, come on ...

The ebook "owner" must copy the ebook to read it, it can't be illegal.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

The ebook "owner" must copy the ebook to read it, it can't be illegal.

On the contrary, it is illegal to read your book as a result of this.

It is convenient to ignore this breach of the ToS, because the vendors want to make sales. But the ToS is as valid as any other ToS. Copying the ebook to your device through ADE is illegal. So is using ereader software (RMSDK) to decrypt and extract the ebook resources from the container format in order to display the ebook onscreen.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

On the contrary, it is illegal to read your book as a result of this.

It is convenient to ignore this breach of the ToS, because the vendors want to make sales. But the ToS is as valid as any other ToS. Copying the ebook to your device through ADE is illegal. So is using ereader software (RMSDK) to decrypt and extract the ebook resources from the container format in order to display the ebook onscreen.

Every TOS I've ever bothered to read explicitly allows for whatever is necessary for the purchaser to use it as (the seller) intends, which is to say, read it on an authorized device. So no, it's not an illegal breach of the TOS to use it as the TOS says you may.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

On the contrary, it is illegal to read your book as a result of this.

It is convenient to ignore this breach of the ToS, because the vendors want to make sales. But the ToS is as valid as any other ToS. Copying the ebook to your device through ADE is illegal. So is using ereader software (RMSDK) to decrypt and extract the ebook resources from the container format in order to display the ebook onscreen.

I wasn't talking about that, I was talking about the fact that when you open a file on your computer you are making a copy of it. So you can't read an ebook without making a copy of it every time you access the file.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

I wasn't talking about that, I was talking about the fact that when you open a file on your computer you are making a copy of it. So you can't read an ebook without making a copy of it every time you access the file.

That, however, is not the same thing as making a copy available to someone else, and is generally explicitly covered by the TOS as part of what you are intended to do with it - read it yourself.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

I wasn't talking about that, I was talking about the fact that when you open a file on your computer you are making a copy of it. So you can't read an ebook without making a copy of it every time you access the file.

Are we really talking about two different things?

I merely said it IS illegal because of the ToS, not that it can't be illegal because otherwise how can you read it.

Regarding making copies, I agree there are many ways to make copies that lawmakers are not aware of.
Although I am unsure how opening a file makes a copy of it (outside of the RAM) -- unless as I said, opening a zipfile, in which case the contents are extracted and saved to TEMP storage, or "~/.cache/". I threw in the transferring-to-ereader part as a bonus.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by taustin

That, however, is not the same thing as making a copy available to someone else, and is generally explicitly covered by the TOS as part of what you are intended to do with it - read it yourself.

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Are we really talking about two different things?

I merely said it IS illegal because of the ToS, not that it can't be illegal because otherwise how can you read it.

Regarding making copies, I agree there are many ways to make copies that lawmakers are not aware of.
Although I am unsure how opening a file makes a copy of it (outside of the RAM) -- unless as I said, opening a zipfile, in which case the contents are extracted and saved to TEMP storage, or "~/.cache/". I threw in the transferring-to-ereader part as a bonus.

I was replying to mandy314's post where the argument was that reselling is not legal because it requires the making of a copy, so I pointed out that copies have to be made for the regular use of the ebook.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

I was replying to mandy314's post where the argument was that reselling is not legal because it requires the making of a copy, so I pointed out that copies have to be made for the regular use of the ebook.

The question never was if reselling an ebook is legal or not. The question in this thread originally was if prohibiting the reselling of an ebook is legal in the terms of use. Sound almost the same, but it is not the same. Only because the terms of use don't prohibit reselling does not automatically mean reselling an ebook is legal. It may or may not be legal under other laws - e.g. copyright laws.