Amazon's new DRM-free MP3 store

[Liviu_5]

Check out this article:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...sic-store.html

While not technically about e-books, it has a lot of interesting things (not that we do not know them by and large) about e-content. For example:

"There are a few restrictions. One of the biggest is that there's no redownloading of tracks; you'd better make a backup, because if you lose a song, you'll have to purchase it again to get another copy. Such a policy has an obvious analogue to Amazon's CD sales. If you purchase a Tim McGraw CD and your NPR-loving uncle "accidentally" cracks the disk in two, you are out of luck; Amazon won't send you another copy. In this sense, then, music downloads are treated like physical property.

But they are not property. In fact, what you have purchased is only a "non-exclusive, non-transferable license" to each song. Because you have not actually purchased something physical, Amazon's terms of service explicitly forbid both re-selling and lending. With a CD, of course, you can do both quite legally. Digital downloads can be cheaper and more convenient, but there's no legal way to extract value from them when your tastes in music change. Caveat emptor."

[andym]

Thanks for that. Well worth checking out.

On the subject of interesting articles in arstechnica check out this one on the next generation of Intel chicps for ultramobiles

[EDIT: oh and here's another one - this time about the AACS content protection system for High Definition Video]

[Aenea]

Let's hope they are going to do this in the future with ebooks as well, DRM-free I mean...

Aenea

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

But they are not property. In fact, what you have purchased is only a "non-exclusive, non-transferable license" to each song. Because you have not actually purchased something physical, Amazon's terms of service explicitly forbid both re-selling and lending. With a CD, of course, you can do both quite legally. Digital downloads can be cheaper and more convenient, but there's no legal way to extract value from them when your tastes in music change. Caveat emptor."

Sounds like an obligatory public service message some editor asked to be added: "Be a good citizen, don't copy and give away files!" As they pointed out, the music market pretty much knows the drill already. So do we.

The "Caveat Emptor" bit was cute...

Anyway, if this is how Amazon plans to sell music, we can only hope that they will follow the same methods when selling e-books.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Sounds like an obligatory public service message some editor asked to be added: "Be a good citizen, don't copy and give away files!" As they pointed out, the music market pretty much knows the drill already. So do we.

The "Caveat Emptor" bit was cute...

Anyway, if this is how Amazon plans to sell music, we can only hope that they will follow the same methods when selling e-books.

Um, No? I want to buy a copy of the ebook. I don't want to buy a license to read it.

[Leaping Gnome]

I'm pretty sure they can't limit your resale abilities. Just because it is electronic does not mean they can overturn the right of first sale, althought it is legally murky as the linked wikipedia article shows.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by Leaping Gnome

I'm pretty sure they can't limit your resale abilities. Just because it is electronic does not mean they can overturn the right of first sale, althought it is legally murky as the linked wikipedia article shows.

Well, since you don't own the music you buy from them, they can legally stop you from reselling it.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

Well, since you don't own the music you buy from them, they can legally stop you from reselling it.

As the Gnome said, that's all wrapped up in the legalese... but reselling the content isn't really the point, is it? Enjoying the content... that's the point, and that's what you're paying for.

I think everyone's just going to have to get used to the fact that digital files changes the old resale equation, whether we like it or not.

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by Leaping Gnome

I'm pretty sure they can't limit your resale abilities. Just because it is electronic does not mean they can overturn the right of first sale, althought it is legally murky as the linked wikipedia article shows.

My personal opinion is that any e-content is licensed not owned, whether drm'ed or not and no legal secondary market is going to evolve. As an individual you most probably can try and sell your e-content but it's going to be on dodgy sites or at best for drm content and with content onwer permission you may be able to transfer your license, not like now when you can list your used book or cd on Amazon for example legally and freely.

I can live with that as long as prices are reasonable and I can be sure that I will be able to read my e-books indefinitely on any device I want (with some care from my part of course not to lose the file), ...

Usually the resale value of most books is negligible anyway.

[nekokami]

I have to admit, most of the reason I've ever bothered trying to resell books was because I couldn't store them and couldn't stand the idea of throwing them away, not because they're worth much. That argument doesn't really hold with digital files. Still, I think the right of first sale is not so easily tossed aside. And I still think most vendors need to come down on prices (e.g. to where Baen is).

[grimo1re]

Well, I like it.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

My personal opinion is that any e-content is licensed not owned, whether drm'ed or not and no legal secondary market is going to evolve.

When it comes down to it, any book, album, DVD and newspaper you buy is licensing a copy of the original product for personalized use. Secondary markets for most items usually come about without the express blessing of the original property owners. However, it's rarely considered an issue unless:

A. The seller creates and sells multiple copies of their single product; or
B. The seller tries to pass themselves off as the original author of someone else's work.

This is because it does not unduly compromise the original author's market, in the eyes of the law. As long as these two caveats are not broken, I don't see why even e-books cannot become a secondary market product in time.