Apple Patent Describes iTunes Reselling and Loaning System

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Patent Describes iTunes Reselling and Loaning System

Posted by timothy on Thursday March 7, 2013 @08:34AM from the on-the-internet dept.

An anonymous reader writes "An Apple patent granted on 7 March details a system allowing customers to resell iTunes and iBooks content to other users at a reduced price, or to loan the content temporarily for free. Such a system could pave the way for second hand content being made available on iTunes for a discounted price." (Note: Beware the auto-playing video ad, with sound.)

10 of 97 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

The actual patent. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-07 08:39 · Score: 2, Insightful

Techniques are provided for managing access to a digital content item (such as an ebook, music, movie, software application) to be transferred from one user to another.

This doesn't say for "itunes" or "ibooks" or anything of the sort.
I'd say it's a toss up if they even plan on implementing it, or just using it as ammo when another entity tries to.
1. Re:The actual patent. by earlzdotnet · 2013-03-07 08:50 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  This! When the next big content company that competes against Apple decides to take a move in the right direction to make their customers happy, Apple will be waiting with this patent, lawyers ready to pounce.
  I've given up all hope that Apple actually wants it's users to be happy
Hmmmm.... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-07 08:41 · Score: 2, Insightful

I thought The Pirate Bay and DRM removal tools had already solved this problem. Funny that Apple's getting a patent for this.
finally, some good sense by noh8rz10 · 2013-03-07 08:46 · Score: 2, Insightful

This approach MAKES A LOT OF SENSE! You have to admit, regardless of your feelings towards apple, this is a step in the direction of breaking down artificial barriers.
1. Re:finally, some good sense by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-07 08:49 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  they only patented it to prevent other people from doing it.
2. Re:finally, some good sense by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-07 08:56 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  They're the ones implementing DRM, they're the ones CREATING the artificial barriers. This patent wouldn't even have use if they didn't try to make things that are not normally scarce into things that are scarce.
3. Re:finally, some good sense by theVarangian · 2013-03-07 09:12 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  they only patented it to prevent other people from doing it.
  Apple patented a system/mechanism for loaning and reselling digital content, not the act of loaning or reselling digital content which is what they'd have to do to prevent others from doing it. Your are free to patent another method to do this. If Apple had patented the loaning or reselling of objects that patent would be discredited faster than you can say 'conspiracy theory'. Humans have been loaning, renting and selling each other objects since somebody invented the stone hand-axe 1.6 million years ago. It's hard to get more prior art than that.
4. Re:finally, some good sense by Silas+is+back · 2013-03-07 10:16 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  To be fair, they implement DRM because the content rights holders want them to. Apple fought to be able to remove DRM from the songs they sell, and they convinced the industry to let them remove it some time ago, which is great and hopefully can expand to the other digital content soon.
  
  --
  this sig is useless
Re:Used content seems a contrived absurdity... by Ungrounded+Lightning · 2013-03-07 08:56 · Score: 4, Insightful

"second hand content" ...as in second hand DIGITAL content?
Do explain to me what a used bit looks like, if you will...
It's actually the license contract and viewing rights that are second-hand. The bits of the "content" just come with it.

--
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
And Apple takes their cut... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-03-07 09:14 · Score: 4, Insightful

Apple will naturally take a percentage of every "used book" sale. It is of course the same in the existing market, where a second hand book shop will typically buy a book for about 1/4 cover price and then turn around and sell it at 1/2 cover price. All fine and good, it's a service and you pay for it.
The difference is that Apple will provide the ONLY method through which the used goods can be sold. There is no way to cut out the middle man or even choose a different middle man.