If you buy a regular older book , CD or DVD , you could move around around and loan it to a admirer , or betray it again . The right to pass it along is called the “ first cut-rate sale ” philosophical system . Digital books , music and movies are a different level though . Four student at Columbia Law School’sScience and Technology Law Reviewlooked at the particular issue of reselling and imitate e - books downloaded to Amazon ’s Kindle or theSony Reader , and come up with answer to a primal motion : Are you buying a crippled license to intellectual holding when you download , or are you buy an honest - to - God account book ?
In the all right print that you “ consort ” to , Amazon and Sony say you just get a license to the e - books — you’re not paying to own ’em , in spitefulness of the utilisation of the term “ buy . ” Digital retailers say that the first sale philosophy — which would allow you hawk your old Harry Potter hardcover on eBay — no longer applies . Your permit to interpret the book is unlimited , though — so even if Amazon or Sony change technologies , drop the game or just got mad at you , they lawfully could n’t take away your purchases . Still , it ’s a licence you ca n’t sell .
But is this claim sound ? Our Columbia friends suggest that just because Sony or Amazon call it a licence , that does n’t make it so . “ That ’s a factual question determined by court , ” say our sound brainiacs . “ Even if a publishing firm call it a license , if the dealing really looks more like a sales agreement , substance abuser will retain their right to resell the copy . ” Score one for the home team .
There ’s a kicker , though : If a court of justice find with you on that front , you still ca n’t sell breeding of your copy , an illegal act tantamount to Xeroxing your Harry Potters . You ’d have to sell the physical media where the “ original ” download is stack away — a unvoiced drive or the actual Kindle or Sony Reader . Our guess is that it only catch more complicated from here . What happens when the Indian file itself resides only on some $ 20 - per - calendar month Google storage locker ?
For more details , have a look at the original , surprisingly readable legal sum-up :
The ( Potential ) Legal Validity of vitamin E - al-Qur’an Reader Restrictions By Rajiv Batra , John Padro , Seung - Ju Paik and Sarah Calvert
Many user are unhappy that e - rule book readers , such as the Sony Reader and the Amazon Kindle , restrict the communion , borrowing and transferring of e - book . While some reason that the “ first sale ” ism should allow users to shift an e - book in the same manner as a hard - written matter playscript , these contentious restrictions may be valid under current law .
The Sony Reader and the Amazon Kindle
The Sony Reader and the Amazon Kindle are portable spiritualist devices designed to carry and exhibit due east - Quran and other electronic documents . Kindle has a mobile broadband function that admit exploiter to browse online content and download atomic number 99 - Book while on the go . or else , the Sony Reader requires users to download and manage their library of e - books via a rest home computer .
The combative characteristic of both product is that they bar users from sharing their e - books with other exploiter . For exemplar , Kindle ’s licence agreement grants a “ non - exclusive rightfield to keep a permanent transcript … solely for your personal , non - commercial utilisation . ” Consequently , Kindle user may “ not sell , rent , letting , distribute , program , sublicense or otherwise assign any rights to … any third party . ” The Sony Reader has similarly restrictive lyric in its license , but does let users to replicate e - books to several other lecturer as long as they are registered to the same account .
The First Sale Doctrine
Some user have argued that these permit restriction infract the “ first sales event ” philosophical system . Under the Copyright Act , the first sale doctrine allow the owner of a fussy copy of a work to sell , lease or pull that copy to anyone they require at any price they prefer . These right only employ , however , to the particular copy that was purchase ; any unauthorized reproduction or copying of that piece of work constitute copyright infringement . For instance , you ca n’t give away photocopy of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows , but you’re able to auction your paper-back book on eBay when you ’re finished with it .
When it come to digital works , however , two complications arise : first , consumers might only contain a license to the content , rather than all of the rights that come up from a cut-rate sale ; second , without a traditional strong-arm container for each purchased piece of work , consumers may not practically be able to deal their “ particular copy ” at all .
License vs. sales agreement
The first sale doctrine only applies to the “ proprietor ” of a written matter of a work , so end substance abuser who gain content by permit do not relish the right to resell their copy . Whether a transaction is a permit or a sale is a factual interrogation determined by courts — even if a publishing firm calls it a license , if the transaction really looks more like a cut-rate sale , users will hold back their right to resell the copy . However , as more commercial transaction require the transfer of digital content — particularly commercial-grade software — courts have struggle to consistently make the distinction between license and sales agreement . Software is increasingly transferred with highly restrictive licensing terms , but Union case police force has not intelligibly determined whether these character of transferee are permission or true sales .
Kindle and the Sony Reader are accompany this licensing trend and creating restrictive licenses that users must agree to upon using the product . If these agreements are find to be enforceable licenses , they could serve as the legal authority to restrict users from sell or otherwise transferring the e - books they download .
Amazon vs. Sony
Both license schemes are every bit restrictive , but each product limits use in a somewhat unlike mode . Amazon Kindle ’s utilisation license expressly limits the extent and consumption of both the twist and the digital medium . The Sony Reader ’s restriction operate in two whole tone : a license to use the twist and a 2d license to use the e - book library package ( produce by Sony ) . In both devices , user are not allowed to beat or interpolate the pre - installed software on the gimmick .
For digital medium , Kindle ’s agreement allows substance abuser one permanent transcript . The Reader , on the other script , allows one user to posse comitatus multiple copies as long as they are all register to that substance abuser . Both authorities are every bit restrictive on the distribution , copying , and share-out of purchased eastward - books ( to other drug user ) .
The reason for the difference in these restrictions is a result of their technical characteristic . Amazon ’s wireless store take the terms to be agreed on ab initio , while the Sony Reader ’s reliance on iTunes - similar software allow a freestanding use agreement . In core , both agreement accomplish the same tier of restriction , but you have a piffling more leeway with the telephone number of transcript with the Sony Reader .
Hard Copies vs. Digital Copies
Another possible complication stems from the inherent divergence between transferring an atomic number 99 - book and transferring a hard - copy Good Book . The transportation of a hard - copy Quran is just that ; the physical transport of one copy . The transfer of an einsteinium - book , however , requires the digital recreation or copying of that eastward - book . Because the first sales event doctrine allows transfer of only your particular copy , and not breeding or refreshment , a digital transportation of an e - playscript is probably impermissible . Thus , user of Kindle and the Sony Reader can only lawfully transmit works by selling the physical medium on which they are stack away — be that the vitamin E - book readers themselves or the users ’ hard drives .
While the restrictions on tocopherol - books may initially seem inconsistent with the rights granted for hard - copy books , these difference are the consequence of new digital products outgrowing traditional right of first publication philosophical system . Such issues are currently being examined by effectual student and industry insiders , but only clip will tell whether this degree of control over digital media is acceptable to society .
[ Columbia Science and Technology Law Review ]
Daily Newsletter
Get the best tech , science , and culture word in your inbox day by day .
News from the future , deliver to your present .
You May Also Like
