Another one for those who like to discuss about the industry...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19842851
Thoughts?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19842851
Thoughts?
Digital Files Redistribution... (ReDigi). Anyone heard of this?
- Thread starter AngraRULES
- Start date
seh750
Member
That's an interesting concept and interesting legal question. The quote above in the article caught my attention because standard practice for software developers (myself included) is to include a phrase in the license agreement that disallows the sale of software. The end user is essentially licensing the use of the software, not purchasing it. I don't know of any cases in the US that strengthen the argument one way or the other, to confirm what the license agreements say or to say that selling used software is explicitly allowed.
Relating this back to the music side of things, the above makes me wonder if US and EU laws will treat ReDigi's business differently?
_Wes
StrangeBass
Redigi seems to have locked down what files they will accept pretty tight - only songs purchased on iTunes. That being said, unscrupulous people will be unscrupulous, so there will be folks who rips songs to cd as a way round the rules. Interesting concept. And 'used' digital copies won't have scratches on them!
The music business as a whole needs to work with the people that want music, or they will not matter any more. And bands and musicians that are successful without the suits, will just prove it.
Adapt or be left behind.
The music business as a whole needs to work with the people that want music, or they will not matter any more. And bands and musicians that are successful without the suits, will just prove it.
Adapt or be left behind.
SkiBumMSP
Member
Being a software engineer myself, that is how it was, in that when people "purchase" software, they are actually buying a license to use, not the software itself. However, I have to side that what if a company has, say, 50 licenses for Microsoft Office, but only actually needed 25? Should they be able to sell off those extra 25 licenses to another business that could use them (or even let the employees purchase them individually for personal/home use?).
Again, bringing back to the music realm (especially considering that music is really, in essence, "software"), does the same apply? I vaguely remember seeing something in the past that some outfit was attempting to set up a business to let people resell "used" digital copies of music. How that can be managed and how it will play out in terms of copyright laws will be interesting. I kinda like the concept - as there are some files that I've gotten in the past, but don't really listen to anymore or were just not that impressed with the music. I don't want to delete them right now since storage is so dirt cheap these days, but it would be need to be able to unload them to somebody else that may want them for say $2/album or $.25 per track.
I have yet to purchase digital music and stuff like this is the reason why. Digital music is ridiculously overpriced for what it is and then sellers want to attach strings. It's like I'm paying for a car yet only getting a license to drive it under certain circumstances. I like the physical artifact like a CD and there is no question that I can resell it later. Sure I probably will not get much but the first sale doctrine in the US makes it clear that the copyright owner can't control the later resale--as it should be. If I'm unscrupulous, I can buy a CD and copy it onto my computer, iPod, and burn a copy and then resell it. The ReDigi system seems like it offers more protection to (c) holders than a CD and yet EMI fights it. These are the things that push more people in the direction of piracy.
MeTuLHeD
A Member To Remember
I personally think that the bell is tolling for the traditional record industry. I foresee a future in which bands market themselves via an ever growing chain of digital distribution networks. After all, I can download a lossless rip in about ten minutes or less. Soon bands will just offer their stuff via direct download and THEY will get to keep the lion's share of the profits. This whole battle is because the lawyers are fighting to keep their hands in the artist's wallet. Soon...
J-Dubya 777
It NEVER ends
I agree 110% with this....Hopefully, the "artwork" will be included with the downloads, as some of us still like product that you can hold in your hand...
AeonicSlumber
srs
- Aug 14, 2008
- 4,893
- 0
- 36
If I'm not mistaken, there was already a recent ruling that re-selling digital games is illegal, so I really doubt ReDigi has much of a case, regardless of the ethics/arguments they can make.
That being said, the courts DO allow you to re-sell a computer with games already installed on it. I wonder if the same provision would be made for MP3s. Can you imagine selling a computer with 20,000 songs on it? 100,000? None of that money going to the artist/copyright holders. Really sticky shit.
Braxil
Member
The more things like this I read, the more I become convinced that there is zero chance of copyrights surviving for long in this digital age. Whether you agree with it or not, business models for everything that is distributed in or can be converted to a digital medium are going to change, and eventually the law will have to as well.
This is just more rampant hypocrisy on the part of EMI and other labels. They love to parade around the ridiculous notion that copying 1s and 0s from one drive to another is the equivalent of pocketing a CD and dashing out of a store... but when someone takes the labels' own claim to its inevitable conclusion, digital files are suddenly completely different than physical media. Which is not to say ReDigi's concept is any less ridiculous, of course.
General Zod
Ruler of Australia
This is a fantastic point. Since this discussion began, the record industry has been telling us that stealing a digital file is no different than stealing a car. However, they now want to tell us we can't sell that car? Sounds like they want to have their cake and eat it to. As others have pointed out, they will likely get neither.
Similar threads
