Slashdot Mirror


Apple Can Delete Purchased Movies From Your Library Without Telling You (theoutline.com)

Casey Johnston, writing for The Outline: When you buy a movie on iTunes, it's yours forever, until such a time as when Apple maybe loses the rights to distribute it, and then it will disappear from your library without a trace. This is what happened to Anders G. da Silva, who goes by @drandersgs on Twitter, and who tweeted about losing three movies bought on the iTunes Store.

When da Silva wrote to Apple to complain about the missing movies, Apple wrote back to him that "the content provider has removed these movies from the Canadian Store. Hence, these movies are not available in the Canada iTunes Store at this time." For his trouble in notifying Apple that it had disappeared three of his ostensible belongings for incredibly dubious legal reasons, Apple offered da Silva not even a refund, but two credits for renting a movie on the iTunes Store "priced up to $5.99 USD." After he argued that he was not in the market for rentals and would just like the movies he purchased, please, Apple tried to appease him with two more rental credits.

27 of 326 comments (clear)

  1. Never Buy Apple by rea1l1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Never buy Apple unless you are okay with being a slave to their dictatorial policies. Please support Linux.

    1. Re:Never Buy Apple by Jason1729 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Never "buy" content from any of these online streaming services. It's all rented and always has been. And not just Apple.

      This is the "victim's" fault for not understanding what he was doing, this was obvious from day one. But people argue how much better and easier it is than old fashioned discs. And they will continue to "buy" into these pay per view streaming services.

    2. Re:Never Buy Apple by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don’t mind pay per view or all-you-can-eat services like Spotify, because you are getting exactly what you are paying for: one view (or multiple views in a very short timeframe) of a particular movie, or access to whatever is on offer with the streaming service. If you don’t like their collection anymore, cancel your subscription at the end of the month.

      If however you aim to build a library, physical discs or download-to-own content unencumbered by DRM are the only way to go. Everything else is just paying full price for rentals.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    3. Re:Never Buy Apple by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is the "victim's" fault for not understanding what he was doing, this was obvious from day one.

      Not at all. This is unequivocally Apple's fault for describing it as a "purchase" instead of as a "rental". If Apple didn't secure a license to the content for effectively "forever" (such as a 99-year license) before "selling" the content to the user, then they made the sale in poor faith. Their activity was in fact fraud.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Never Buy Apple by MtHuurne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Their store calls it "buy" and the price is set at a level far above the rent price: everything suggests you can buy movies. Don't blame the victim for not reading the fine print on what seems like a very ordinary consumer purchase.

    5. Re:Never Buy Apple by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I expect that if you read the terms of service (you do read that, before you click "OK"buying anything, you are renting it, anybody who doesn't understand that needs a keeper.

      Most people can't understand the ToS. They are deliberately written to be difficult to understand, and contain unnecessary verbiage to discourage people from digging into them to begin with. That's part of why we have laws governing contracts. Further, pretending that the meanings of words doesn't matter is bollocks. Apple deliberately confused customers, and the ToS doesn't change that.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Never Buy Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You mean the TOS that they can change whenever they want? That TOS? Also, is everyone a lawyer, now? Because if not, maybe go fuck yourself with your TOS bullllshit.

    7. Re:Never Buy Apple by Anubis+IV · · Score: 4, Informative

      I completely agree, but I also think this summary is being a bit unfair. Apple didn't reach into his hard drive to delete his local copies. They simply pulled the listing from their store, meaning that new downloads and streaming are no longer possible.

      It's the same practice they've had across all their services for years. When a developer pulls an app from the app store, the app's users get to keep their local copies, can transfer them to new devices, and can otherwise use them without issue. Same thing for films. My wife had a dozen films she had purchased in iTunes before we got married, and they all still work fine (though these days I have her buying DRM-free so that we can get them into Plex more easily). I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Apple lost the rights to distribute some of her films, but we'd likely never know.

    8. Re:Never Buy Apple by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Informative

      Google Play is the only major service selling DRM free audiobooks. Audible/Amazon has DRM, iTunes has DRM.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:Never Buy Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've purchased plenty of DVDs and Blu-ray discs from Amazon. I've yet to have an Amazon employee show up at my door to reclaim them.

    10. Re:Never Buy Apple by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's why some countries have legislation against that sort of semi-hidden clauses. Germany for instance.
      Besides, if the word "Sale" is displayed prominently and Apple's option to "retract" the content is only somewhere in the small print, the two directly contradict each other. So in court, the judge would have to decide which takes precedence. Common sense might say the "sale" that was written in big letters in the ad.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    11. Re:Never Buy Apple by Anubis+IV · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually not true.

      Actually, it is. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

      While it's true that the kill switch exists, it isn't what happens when Apple loses the license to content or a developer pulls their app under normal conditions, nor is it related in any way to what happened here or what we're talking about. The only times I'm aware of the kill switch being used are for malware apps, and even then, Apple has only ever used it sparingly.

      Just to highlight how loathe Apple is to use the kill switch, I once purchased an app that—if the user entered a particular sequence of buttons—turned the phone into a WiFi hotspot without the need for any jailbreaking. This was back in the time when carriers didn't allow iPhones to be used that way. Apple yanked the app from the store within a few hours of the sequence going viral, but you know what they didn't do? Delete it from my devices or prevent me from using it in any way. I used that app for years, and then it went with me to the next phone, and the one after that, until it finally stopped working years and years later after an OS update dropped compatibility for apps that hadn't been updated.

      So yes, while they can kill apps (to which I never suggested otherwise), they didn't do that here, so let's stay on topic.

    12. Re:Never Buy Apple by bjwest · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apple didn't reach into his hard drive to delete his local copies. They simply pulled the listing from their store, meaning that new downloads and streaming are no longer possible.

      Then they should pull it from the store but leave it available for download for those who've purchased it. Da Silva purchased a license for these three songs from Apple, and Apple payed the licensor their share of the sale. It shouldn't matter if Apple looses their license to distribute the product, da Silva already purchased it and Apple is now a cloud storage location for that particular file. Either that, or the license holder needs to provide a means for legally purchased media to be downloaded by those who, in good faith, purchased it.

      --

      --- Keep the choice with the user..
    13. Re: Never Buy Apple by saloomy · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is kind of a half-true story though. The movies are yours when you buy them from Apple, and you can download them and have them forever. They will not delete from your devices. What Apple also gives you is the ability to redownload them onto other devices and at a later time, but it has to retain the right to do so. When the movie companies change their contracts on Apple, this is what happens.

      I doubt Apple wanted to lose the rights to redistribute purchased content for reasons exactly like this story, they get painted as the bad guy. This was just poor negotiations for perpetual purchases and the guy lost out since he didn't maintain his purchased copy.

      What I do fault Apple for is not notifying the gentleman that his movie would be gone from online distribution a week prior to its removal so he could facilitate getting a copy offline for himself. That's what sucks about this, and is a place I think Apple could improve its process pretty easily with a simple push notification

  2. Yep by AlanBDee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is why I buy the Blu-ray and rip it to my NAS; at least on shows I want to still have access to in 20 years. (Yes, I still have VHS tapes and a VCR)

  3. Re:You didn't purchase movies by olsmeister · · Score: 5, Funny

    OK. I'll pray they don't alter the deal further.

  4. Buyer beware, but you're not buying anything? by TomR+teh+Pirate · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My kids have on occasion wanted to buy movies from Comcast and I have resisted specifically because I don't want to have to do business with a specific utility in order to maintain access to purchased content. Instead, I have allowed that content to be purchased from the equivalent of merchants like Apple and Amazon. This story sets a dangerous path that suggests physical media may still be the only way to go. It also gives a certain amount of moral license back to torrent downloads.

    1. Re: Buyer beware, but you're not buying anything? by jabuzz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If its on his own Plex server then the closing of the Plex Cloud Service will have zero impact on him. I purchase everything on DVD/Bluray (and some iplayer downloading as I like in the UK) and the rip it before uploading to the Plex server which lives in my house. The closing of the Plex cloud service impacts me not a bit. In my house if you want to watch a DVD or Bluray it needs putting on Plex first as I don't have a DVD or Bluray player. Also if you want to listen to a CD that will need ripping too.

  5. Which is why... by genfail · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...movies are always free on The Pirate Bay.

  6. No "digital" by bkr1_2k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is why we don't buy anything as a download. Physical media only. I'll take the time to rip it myself. If you want to own it, you have to have something physical to maintain control of it.

    --
    "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
  7. This is why we need consumer protection by nine-times · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is why we need stronger consumer protection. This isn't a weird, difficult, complex issue. In my mind, there's a very simple solution to this:

    Make it illegal for digital media stores to remove access to anything that has been purchased. If, for some reason, they're unable to continue hosting it for streaming, they should be legally required to provide you with a DRM-free download.

    Or else, they should be barred from using words like "buy" or "purchase". They can offer "long term rentals" with clear and explicit wording that access may be revoked at any time. Those disclaimers should not be buried in a EULA or terms of service. It should be legally required to be displayed obviously each time the long-term rental is offered.

    You could debate some of the details, but the basic gist should be clear: Either provide people with what they "bought", or make it clear that they're not buying it.

    1. Re:This is why we need consumer protection by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is why we need stronger consumer protection. This isn't a weird, difficult, complex issue. In my mind, there's a very simple solution to this:

      Make it illegal for digital media stores to remove access to anything that has been purchased. If, for some reason, they're unable to continue hosting it for streaming, they should be legally required to provide you with a DRM-free download.

      Your post makes some fine points, but let's all remember this happened in Canada. Had it happened in the USA, there may be a legal precedent basically in favor of what you proposed. The actor Bruce Willis got into a case where he wanted to leave his legally purchased song downloads to his children in his will and he had to go to court for the right to do that. He won. The providers of his downloads basically argued that Willis had entered into what was, in effect, a rental agreement for the songs, and as such no rights were transferable upon his death. He won and established the idea that he actually paid for the songs, he owned his copies, and as such they were his property to give away to his heirs in his will if he wished.

  8. BitTorrent by atomicalgebra · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Good reason to go back to bitTorrent. Buying should mean you own it.

  9. It's Not About Buying vs Leasing by Blue+Stone · · Score: 5, Informative

    In this case, however, she bought the movies and then deleted them from her system. She was relying on Apple's service to be able to re-download them again.

    These are two seperate things.

    If she had kept her local copies, Apple would not have removed these items from her computer; they were, however, unable to re-supply her with copies of the movies she'd bought via their service because thye'd lost the licensing rights to distribute said movies.

    Imagine a store that you buy a DVD from that also allows you to stream a copy of the same DVD from their servers. If you lose the DVD, or destroy it, you can stream the movie until they lose licensing rights. If you don't lose or destroy the DVD, you don't have to rely on this third party.

    The person in the story 'destroyed their DVD' and then their streaming provider lost their distribution rights.

    She relied on a third party backup. She thought this was a guaranteed service. She was wrong.

    None of this, however, has anything to do with buying vs leasing/licensing/renting and companies telling you you bought something when you merely licensed or rented it (although this remains an issue in digital consumer law in any number of countries). If she'd kept her downloaded copy, she'd still have it.

    --
    Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    1. Re:It's Not About Buying vs Leasing by citylivin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If thats what happened, its still a joke. People rely on the cloud to back up their stuff. Anything can happen to local storage, and the apple ecosystem is so tied to the internet.

      Can you even pull an mp4 file out of itunes with this movie to properly back it up? I would guess no.

      Its hard to make an analogy, as there is no real life equivalent to repositories of software. But one assumes that purchases are for life and that if they have some licensing problem, they should prevent new downloads but honour downloads for things people have paid for.

      Perhaps its like leasing a car, that then gets into an accident, and you go back to the dealer to get a lease replacement only to be told there are no other cars available, but you still have to continue making lease payments for a car you no longer have access to.

      Oh well, not my problem personally. As everyone else moves to streaming I maintain my local library which is triple backed up.

      --
      As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
  10. Re:Why buy? by jwhyche · · Score: 4, Informative

    Spoken like someone that doesn't have kids. How many times I've heard that damn crab crone "kiss the girl.?" Thank god I drew the line at a teletubby disk collection.

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  11. Re:Shock Horror by Aighearach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The words "purchase" and "contract" are not synonyms, though.

    If you don't own the content, you did not purchase the content. If you did purchase it, then you do own it. And if somebody takes it away and says otherwise, perhaps they actually stole it? That can be true even if they claim to have authorized themselves.