If you buy a approved old book, CD or DVD, you can about-face about and accommodation it to a friend, or advertise it again. The appropriate to canyon it forth is alleged the "first sale" doctrine. Agenda books, music and movies are a altered adventure though. Four acceptance at Columbia Law School's Science and Technology Law Review looked at the accurate affair of reselling and artful e-books downloaded to Amazon's Kindle or the Sony Reader, and came up with answers to a axiological question: Are you affairs a bedridden authorization to intellectual property if you download, or are you affairs an honest-to-God book?
In the accomplished book that you "agree" to, Amazon and Sony say you just get a authorization to the e-books—you're not paying to own 'em, in animosity of the use of the appellation "buy." Agenda retailers say that the aboriginal bargain doctrine—which would let you militarist your old Harry Potter hardcovers on eBay—no best applies. Your authorization to apprehend the book is unlimited, though—so even if Amazon or Sony afflicted technologies, alone the biz or just got mad at you, they accurately couldn't yield abroad your purchases. Still, it's a authorization you can't sell.
But is this affirmation legal? Our Columbia accompany advance that just because Sony or Amazon alarm it a license, that doesn't achieve it so. "That's a absolute catechism bent by courts," say our acknowledged brainiacs. "Even if a administrator calls it a license, if the transaction in fact looks added like a sale, users will absorb their appropriate to resell the copy." Score one for the home team.
There's a kicker, though: If a cloister disqualified with you on that front, you still can't advertise reproductions of your copy, an actionable act alike to Xeroxing your Harry Potters. You'd accept to advertise the concrete media area the "original" download is stored—a harder drive or the absolute Kindle or Sony Reader. Our assumption is that it alone gets added complicated from here. What happens if the book itself resides alone on some $20-per-month Google accumulator locker?
For added details, accept a attending at the original, decidedly clear acknowledged summary:
The (Potential) Acknowledged Validity of E-book Reader Restrictions By Rajiv Batra, John Padro, Seung-Ju Paik and Sarah CalvertMany users are black that e-book readers, such as the Sony Reader and the Amazon Kindle, bind the sharing, borrowing and appointment of e-books. While some altercate that the "first sale" article should acquiesce users to alteration an e-book in the aforementioned address as a hard-copy book, these advancing restrictions may be accurate beneath accepted law.
The Sony Reader and the Amazon Kindle
The Sony Reader and the Amazon Kindle are carriageable media accessories advised to backpack and affectation e-books and added cyberbanking documents. Kindle has a adaptable broadband action that allows users to browse online agreeable and download e-books while on the go. Alternatively, the Sony Reader requires users to download and administer their library of e-books via a home computer.
The advancing appropriate of both articles is that they bar users from administration their e-books with added users. For example, Kindle's authorization acceding grants a "non-exclusive appropriate to accumulate a abiding copy...solely for your personal, non-commercial use." Consequently, Kindle users may "not sell, rent, lease, distribute, broadcast, sublicense or contrarily accredit any rights to...any third party." The Sony Reader has analogously akin accent in its license, but does acquiesce users to archetype e-books to several added Readers as continued as they are registered to the aforementioned account.
The Aboriginal Bargain Doctrine
Some users accept argued that these authorization restrictions breach the "first sale" doctrine. Beneath the Absorb Act, the aboriginal bargain article allows the buyer of a accurate archetype of a plan to sell, charter or hire that archetype to anyone they wish at any amount they choose. These rights alone apply, however, to the accurate archetype that was purchased; any crooked reproduction or artful of that plan constitutes absorb infringement. For instance, you can't accord abroad photocopies of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, but you can bargain your album on eBay if you're accomplished with it.
When it comes to agenda works, however, two complications arise: first, consumers ability alone ascendancy a authorization to the content, rather than all of the rights that appear from a sale; second, after a adequate concrete alembic for anniversary purchased work, consumers may not about be able to advertise their "particular copy" at all.
License vs. Sale
The aboriginal bargain article alone applies to the "owner" of a archetype of a work, so end users who access agreeable by authorization do not adore the appropriate to resell their copies. Whether a transaction is a authorization or a bargain is a absolute catechism bent by courts—even if a administrator calls it a license, if the transaction in fact looks added like a sale, users will absorb their appropriate to resell the copy. However, as added bartering affairs absorb the alteration of agenda content—particularly bartering software—courts accept struggled to consistently achieve the acumen amid authorization and sale. Software is added transferred with awful akin licensing terms, but federal case law has not acutely bent whether these types of transfers are licenses or accurate sales.
Kindle and the Sony Reader are afterward this licensing trend and creating akin licenses that users accept to accede to aloft application the product. If these agreements are begin to be acknowledged licenses, they could serve as the acknowledged ascendancy to absolute users from affairs or contrarily appointment the e-books they download.
Amazon vs. Sony
Both authorization schemes are appropriately restrictive, but anniversary artefact banned use in a hardly altered manner. Amazon Kindle's use authorization especially banned the admeasurement and use of both the accessory and the agenda media. The Sony Reader's restrictions achieve in two steps: a authorization to use the accessory and a additional authorization to use the e-book library software (created by Sony). In both devices, users are not accustomed to avoid or adapt the pre-installed software on the device.
For agenda media, Kindle's acceding allows users one abiding copy. The Reader, on the added hand, allows one user to posses assorted copies as continued as they are all registered to that user. Both regimes are appropriately akin on the distribution, copying, and administration of purchased e-books (to added users).
The acumen for the differences in these restrictions is a aftereffect of their abstruse characteristics. Amazon's wireless abundance requires the acceding to be agreed on initially, while the Sony Reader's assurance on iTunes-like software allows a abstracted use agreement. In effect, both agreements achieve the aforementioned akin of restriction, but you accept a little added elbowroom with the amount of copies with the Sony Reader.
Hard Copies vs. Agenda Copies
Another accessible aggravation stems from the inherent aberration amid appointment an e-book and appointment a hard-copy book. The alteration of a hard-copy book is just that; the concrete alteration of one copy. The alteration of an e-book, however, requires the agenda amusement or artful of that e-book. Because the aboriginal bargain article allows transfers of alone your accurate copy, and not reproductions or recreations, a agenda alteration of an e-book is apparently impermissible. Thus, users of Kindle and the Sony Reader can alone accurately address works by affairs the concrete media on which they are stored—be that the e-book readers themselves or the users' harder drives.
While the restrictions on e-books may initially assume inconsistent with the rights accepted for hard-copy books, these differences are the aftereffect of new agenda articles outgrowing adequate absorb doctrines. Such issues are currently getting advised by acknowledged advisers and industry insiders, but alone time will acquaint whether this amount of ascendancy over agenda media is adequate to society.
[Columbia Science and Technology Law Review]
No hay comentarios :