Universal Attacks First Sale Doctrine
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "In Universal Music Group v. Augusto, UMG is attacking the first sale doctrine. The issue concerns some promotional CDs that were mailed out, and later found their way to eBay. According to UMG, the stickers on the discs claiming that they still own the CD give them a legal right to control what the recipients do with them, and thus, UMG should be able to dictate terms. The EFF has filed an amicus brief countering that claim, saying that because they were sent by US mail, unrequested by the recipient, they are in fact gifts, no matter what the sticker claims. If UMG somehow wins this, I plan to send them CD of copyrighted expletives with a sticker informing them of the contractually required storage location. We discussed a similar issue with e-books a couple weeks ago."
Of course, on /. there's the normal "I have the physical copy, I can do whatever I want with it" mentality.
But what if Universal had signed a contract with each and every DJ and reviewer that got a promo copy that said "in exchange for getting this CD a week early, you have to keep it secret." Would people still be in favor of the rule that the person with their hands on the physical copy gets to do whatever they want with it?
It seems like if this were a once-off transaction there'd be no doubt that the world would be better off if the person with the physical object gets to resell it, no matter what the contract says. But is the world better off if Universal sees what happens and stops giving out review and promo copies? People complained when Maxim reviewed a CD without listening to it but there's no way for print publications to review albums without advance/promo copies. The print publication cycle is so slow that if a magazine had to wait to buy its copy at Amazon or the iTunes store then the review would be three months stale. And Universal is going to quite logically not send out promo copies if they find their way out before the release date; they don't want an unfinished product on the shelf any more than you want your neighbors looking at you before you finish dressing.
There's more than just this case. Maybe the tradeoff is that we're willing to give up promo copies in exchange to keep the doctrine of first sale pure. But maybe we're not. It's not an easy issue and there are arguments on both sides.
So, if I'm sent a promotional, but unrequested book, would it lose its copyright?! I could photocopy it of course and give it to friends, possibly as an example of "promotional products handed over to me". But, it sounds far reaching that it would lose its copyright. If I'm sent unrequested GPL Code, which relies on copyright, I don't think that code would lose its copyright either.
For me and most sane folks on Slashdot, Macthorpe's weird obsession with twitter is the current running joke. It's like Macthorpe has a schoolboy crush on him and expresses it by constantly pulling twitter's hair and putting bugs down his shirt. The two of them should get a room because it's pretty obvious they're about to start making out, and no one wants to see that.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton