Digital Renting? Or Ownership?

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by GeoffR

The main reason I prefer to buy rather than rent is that many ebooks (most, if reading backlist) contain many (many, many) errors. I can fix errors in books I buy the first time I read them, and thereafter I have an error-free book to re-read as many times as I like. Doesn't work so well if I rent.

I have done that a couple times as well. Also, when passages in a book represent diaries or other narrative asides I like to indent and italicize those.

[Wearever]

I would rather own my books, I don't mind streaming movies & T.V. shows, Music I want to own also. I have noticed a real trend in renting everything now. They control the( content ) which books are offered each time, and the monthly charges which will go up over time. With purchases I have more options, wait for a sale, or get it for free, for example.

[Freeshadow]

Originally Posted by Apache

This. [...] since I reread books I like I prefer to own.
Apache

This. + replay & rewatch. And since I know that stuff might become unavailable or plainly changed... I'm fine with what's mine

[ebusinesstutor]

I am really enjoying subscription services. Here are some of the ones I use:

Netflix for movies
ScribeD for ebooks
Marvel Unlimited for comics

These give me access to hundreds of thousands of movies, ebooks and comics for less than the cost of one hardcover a month. Great deal!

[Ghitulescu]

Originally Posted by conan50

Up until a few years ago that was my thought, it was practically in my dna. But after a serious health threat, and starting to think about where all my junk would end up, and if it was all even necessary, my thinking started changing.
If I were starting fresh now, I would do the following:
Buy no print books, and only buy ebooks I could not get with a subscription service or through library loan. Buy no music, subscribe to Spotify or some other music streaming service. Buy no videos, only rent what I want to watch and stream: Netflix, Hulu+, and Amazon Prime. Local news with an over the air antenna, no cable, only Internet service.
Less cost, less hassle, and less clutter :-)

Well, one can only rent what is been offered that time.
Nobody will ever provide you all the books, movies, music one would like to see. I would like for instance to see special interest movies, like Faust (1926), or special interest books, or special interest music. Since people like me are a few, while the rest of 7 billion idiots (sorry) want to see The Hobbit just because it's 4k, won't make the distributors acquire the rights for those movies, songs, books for a handful accesses (bulk licensing is based on 7 billion users - it would cost extra to keep track of use profile for each item).

Then it comes down to access. As indicated below

Originally Posted by crossi

I don't want to be dependant on an internet connection or a third party that can change the availability of items I want.
I'm replacing most of my paper books with the ebook versions and 5 or 5000 of them take no more room. Even the digital items I buy I prefer to have backups in my home and on dropbox.

It then comes to price. As below

Originally Posted by conan50

I gave much thought to purchasing some favorite movies rather than renting them, and decided even there I will just rent them. It is around $9.99 to buy a digital SD movie, and about $2.99 to rent that same digital SD movie. If I watch that movie again every 2-3 years, let's say 3 times in 10 years, it still is only the price of having bought 1 digital SD copy. In 5-10 years it will be in a different, maybe better format, and I figure why buy it in a format now that is useless in 5-10 years? I've already been down the VHS to DVD to Blu-Ray road. 4 K or whatever will be next, making anything we buy now useless in a few years. I tried to watch a VHS Christmas movie on my HD TV awhile back, it looked really bad.

Originally Posted by Wearever

I would rather own my books, I don't mind streaming movies & T.V. shows, Music I want to own also. I have noticed a real trend in renting everything now. They control the( content ) which books are offered each time, and the monthly charges which will go up over time. With purchases I have more options, wait for a sale, or get it for free, for example.

Several things nobody, so far, ever thought of.

Books and CDs and DVDs and LPs and MCs can be transferred. Can be sold and bought. Digital rights are personal. There is a nice story about Bruce Willis, read it on the internet.

Then the quality. Most music that are sold/rented is MP3. CDs and DVD-Audios are lossless. Surely, not everyone can tell the difference, otherwise they would have not use the iPhones for playing music, but there is a difference once you know it. Also the music of today isn't HiFi any longer, if it can be called music at all. The white 5cm speakers for smartphones are also not HiFi, yet for their cost one could buy a real hifi amplifier and CD player and enjoy the music.
Movies. Movies are easier to assess. So far, no line exists that could carry a movie at it's Bluray quality to one's home. It works now, as only one or two in a block would use Netflix or whatever. Imagine 200 flats watching the same time (prime time) 200 different movies, all connected to the same optic fibre to the block. Imagine 250 mil Americans wanting to do the same at 8:00PM, after work, while enjoying a beer. Netflix will explode. So movies are often heavily compressed, and most features cut down. I like subtitles. It allows me to leave the volume down, not to disturb the neighbours. Important in particular in Europe, but less important probably in New Mexico or Alaska.
Finally - once everyone will get Netflix, how about commercials? One gets commercials in exchange for free reception. PayTV often drop commercials. But moving everyone to Netflix, who's gonna watch ads any longer? So Netflix will change the viewing conditions, if that would be good for them.
I used Netflix, but can be any service, like Ultraviolet. It's not a hidden ad.
Books. ePubs may help keep the amazonian forest alive . No way. The biggest saving would be if the whole western world will cease using toilet paper.

In short, I like to own the support (one cannot own the content), rather than to rent it from someone, and obey his conditions, that would change in time. The history told us, those that paid attention to, that once an (American) company got monopoly, increases in prices would happen. No names here, these are known. Diversity is always good.

[Ghitulescu]

And, a short reason why is always good to have a hardcopy. The enterprises know this very well, so the lawyers and attorneys.
Printed means that the content is unchangeable.
How about reading a book, rented book, that comprises something that in the future someone would think it's dangerous. So, he decides to remove that offending passage from the book. Or changing it, like in 1984, to say eg that Al Gore defrauded the Florida elections (but still lose them). All the next people will have the wrong info. The book you have it has the true, genuine, original, intended content. Until the firemen come.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by taustin

I have no objections to renting books, movies, or whatever. What I do object to is paying the (more or less) same price as buying it outright in a different format. Which is the case with ebooks.

What do you mean by "buying it outright"?

When you buy an ebook you are buying a licence, which grants you a certain set of rights.

When you buy a paper book, you are also buying a certain set of rights. You "own" the ink and paper; you have only a very limited set of rights to the content of the book. You cannot, for example, hold what copyright law calls a "public performance" of the work (ie read it out loud in a place where the general public can hear it).

[Ghitulescu]

Originally Posted by HarryT

When you buy an ebook you are buying a licence, which grants you a certain set of rights.

When you buy a paper book, you are also buying a certain set of rights. You "own" the ink and paper; you have only a very limited set of rights to the content of the book. You cannot, for example, hold what copyright law calls a "public performance" of the work (ie read it out loud in a place where the general public can hear it).

If you buy a physical medium, you generally don't need a proof of purchase. If you buy electronically an eBook, you may need to show such a certificate when the time is ripe .

You are right in that one can only buy the right to enjoy personally a book, a song, a movie. However, unlike the studios/publishers/RIAA/etc want us to believe, and irrespective of how much the bribed politicians will keep extending the copyright terms, the copyright will eventually expire (lapse is the legal term). After that, the grandson of the original buyer has also the right to read it loud in the public, or do whatever else, nobody can harm him legally.
On the other hand, the electronic digital rights, are fully personal. Even more, some a linked to a particular device. If Apple or Amazon likes, they can change on-the-fly the terms of the contract and you may lose all the eBooks you may have, surely you can sue them, but this will cost you money and certain worries (the well paid attorney they have surely have found a way to make this breach of contract lawful), let alone nerves and health.
While a book of Gutenberg times can still be read, an eBook might cease to be readable if Amazon or Apple decides you "need" a new (an incompatible) eReader. Or when this will finally be dead (eg lack of compatible custom-tailored batteries).
You can't sell eBooks, nor lend them, nor inherit them. So if your granpa invested £40000 into a house (small flat where the pepper grows, if in England), you can have it (if you pay the inheritance fee). If your granpa invested those £40000 into music or eBooks, you can't have them, unless you take the identity of him, which is punishable by law. Or crack his account. Equally punishable. Or pay them again. This time on your name.

[conan50]

A couple of thoughts:
Physical media, books, CDs, DVDs require storage, depending how large the collection--lots of storage. For those living in small apartments or simply unwilling to manage a large collection of everything, renting the media is a viable option. In my experience it is also far more convenient. Time is money, and storing, cleaning, digging through collections of CDs and DVDs is time consuming if you have a large collection. While a quick search using a Roku or Fire TV or Apple TV box gets you streaming the movie right away, or likewise with music, it is time-saving and convenient.
ISPs here in the US are well known (fill in your own word for them). They are more interested in selling expensive Cable TV packages and Digital Phone than improving their Internet service, which robs them of Cable customers as people cut the cord and stream video. It is untenable. Competition via Google Fiber or some other competitor is our best hope. I expect the Cable companies will upgrade over time, but right now many places in the US have third world Internet service, mostly thanks to Cable Providers. But when Google Fiber shows up, you see how fast these ISPs change their tune, how much better their download and upload speeds become. It will take time, but eventually we will see better quality Internet streaming.

[Yolina]

Originally Posted by conan50

digging through collections of CDs is time consuming if you have a large collection.

Loads of vinyls rather than CDs in my case but... all in alphabetical order and release date - I can find anything in a few seconds Cleaning all these is a PITA though I agree! I don't mind buying MP3s but the main thing is buying I'd never go for a streaming subscription. Same with books - paper or e-format is all fine with me (and not tied to a format thanks to our friend Alf) but I wouldn't want Kindle Unlimited or other book rental system.

[conan50]

Originally Posted by Yolina

Loads of vinyls rather than CDs in my case but... all in alphabetical order and release date - I can find anything in a few seconds Cleaning all these is a PITA though I agree! I don't mind buying MP3s but the main thing is buying I'd never go for a streaming subscription. Same with books - paper or e-format is all fine with me (and not tied to a format thanks to our friend Alf) but I wouldn't want Kindle Unlimited or other book rental system.

My wife and I stopped by a music store the other day and they now have a large selection of vinyl. I told my wife I miss the rich sound of vinyl, but not all that popping, hissing, and skipping with the albums :-)
I got rid of thousands of print books to go digital, and very much enjoy the space it freed up in my house. I carry most of those same books now on a 6" device. I had already invested in a modest collection of CDs, so Pandora and Internet radio supplement my music collection now. But if I were starting fresh with music today, I would just subscribe to a service.

[latepaul]

Some mentioned Bruce Willis earlier and no he didn't sue Apple for the right to bequeath his iTunes library. However googling that led me to this, which I found an interesting read. I'd actually been thinking of appointing a "digital executor" i.e. leave a master password with a friend.

The message seems to be if you want to leave digital media to your family the best way to do it (currently) is to make sure it's loaded onto some device. So I guess those people who want ereaders with large memory and/or SD card slots have it right

[Yolina]

Originally Posted by conan50

But if I were starting fresh with music today, I would just subscribe to a service.

Except that I have some music where even now not everything is available as MP3s to buy so I doubt very much that it would be on a streaming service. I have digitised my vinyls though so at least I can play stuff in the car
I also wouldn't be able to replace many of my pbooks with e-copies simply because they're not available in that format (and there's a ton of stuff I want to read that's also still in p-book only unfortunately)

[4691mls]

I read a lot of Overdrive library books. I couldn't afford to buy as many books as I read. Also, many books, while entertaining enough to read once, don't inspire rereading.

I do buy some books that I liked enough to want to read again. Also, the library tends to have gaps in series, or to be slow in getting the latest book in a series, so sometimes I get impatient and buy books the library doesn't have yet.

If there were a service that rented epubs, which stocked complete series, had the latest books as soon as they came out, and I didn't have to be on a waiting list for the most popular books, I would consider it if I thought the price was right (not sure what that price would have to be, I haven't given it much thought).

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by latepaul

Some mentioned Bruce Willis earlier and no he didn't sue Apple for the right to bequeath his iTunes library. However googling that led me to this, which I found an interesting read. I'd actually been thinking of appointing a "digital executor" i.e. leave a master password with a friend.

The message seems to be if you want to leave digital media to your family the best way to do it (currently) is to make sure it's loaded onto some device. So I guess those people who want ereaders with large memory and/or SD card slots have it right

No, just a large hard drive. On my computer. Where all my other digital archives are as well. (Backed up to other hard drives elsewhere, but that is a separate matter.)