Slashdot Mirror
Apple Responds To iTunes "First Sale" Question
atallah writes "It looks like Apple has come out and explained its position on resale of songs. It is interesting that they didn't flat-out reject the idea.
Check out this Business Week article."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
There is no first sale in everquest either, you dont own a plate at a restaurant because you used it to eat, Itunes he "owns" the copyrighted material, it resides on HIS computer, so he should be able to sell it HOW HE wants to. Everquest, all the strappings are just part of the service, you dont actually own anything, except the copy of the game you use to use the service.
If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion
iTunes will already happily stream your music collection (including songs bought in the store). Check out Sharing under Preferences.
has anyone read it?
Yep.
i wonder if this is "handled" by the contract you agree to.
The agreement doesn't specifically get into personal resale, but it does stress repeatedly that the product is for "personal, noncommercial use." That language is vague enough to leave the question open :/
but at that point it isn't an iTunes song, it's a below-quality CD rip.
Ripping off of a CD should not cause any sound degradation at all if done propertly. It's the process of encoding it as some lossy format that degrades the quality.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
So maybe what is needed is a statute which makes it mandatory for all DRM systems to allow the purchaser to exercise their first sale rights and transfer the rights to someone else. Though I suppose that there is much chance of this happening as a snowstorm in hades.
They still have a way to go on the store yet, even for Mac users. Last night I tried to buy some Warren Zevon (RIP) and all they had was one album, and several partial albums. The annoying "partial album" results from the patchwork of rights -- they have permission for this and not for that. And you can forget about foreign material (I lived in Germany for years, and have favourite bands, whose stuff is probably on file-sharing but ain't here), and you can forget about small-time performers on indie labels.
If the RIAA members had been willing to attach a $0.99 download charge to Napster (which would have been possible) and distribute it on either a direct or a performing rights society type weighted basis, they would have made so much money. The irony is that their greed and determination to wring every farthing out of the consumer has blinded them to immense piles of dollars, begging to be picked up by whoever is first to the clue. When the class action lawyers figure this out -- which will take a while -- expect to see a bunch of class actions on behalf of the stockholders.