Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Patent Applications Address User-to-User Resale and Lending of iTunes Store Content

charlituna said:
FSD was created when things where physical. It was deemed not a violation of copyright because no copy was being made.
Click to expand...


There was never any contention by copyright holders that libraries were illegally copying their works. No court cases were ever held to decide that question, because the plaintiffs NEVER made any such claim.

Instead, the cases considered the right of exclusive distribution under 17 USC § 106:

Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:
(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;
(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;
(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending; ...
Click to expand...


Please learn about the history of the First Sale Doctrine before expressing opinions about this, the latest threat by those who want to make even more money by restricting the public's access to information.

----------
charlituna said:
But that's not a sale that's a gift. I'm gifting you my Stinky Sally card and you are gifting me your Tommy the Turd card.

It sounds like this system allows for gifting which would not have any fees as no money is involved
Click to expand...

You confuse barter with gifting. There are fundamental differences.
 
charlituna said:
Off topic for the thread and Apple doesn't read this stuff. Go tell them your complaints directly. The feedback page isn't that hard to find if you bother to look
Click to expand...

Yup, feedback is ignored regardless and I'd just had my 3rd nuisance call of the day. It's annoying having "off topic" things disrupt your day, be it on the phone or in a forum isn't it?! :D
 
bartszyszka said:
I don't think Apple wants the DRM, the publishers do.
Click to expand...

Apple wants whatever will make money for Wall Street.

If DRM can produce more profits than DRM-free, Apple wants that.

And if DRM-free puts more money into Wall Street's pockets, then Apple wants DRM-free.

Sheesh. This should not be a surprise to anyone. Apple is not some kind of non-profit foundation trying to make a better world. Apple is trying to get as much money transferred out of the pockets of consumers and into the pockets of hedge funds as possible. Apple has no other goal. None whatsoever.

Apple is a business, and not some sort of do-gooder nonprofit. Sheesh.
 
iGrip said:
There was never any contention by copyright holders that libraries were illegally copying their works.
Click to expand...

I never said that there was given that I never said that libraries are photocopying books to hand out to folks. Nor did I say they were buying books at Barnes and Noble and lending them without authorization from the publisher/distributor (which has nothing to do with First Sale Doctrine)

Perhaps you need a lesson in reading comprehension so you can reply to what folks actually say and not what you want to think they said so you can come off as a smarty pants by 'correcting' them.

----------
iGrip said:
Apple wants whatever will make money for Wall Street.

.
Click to expand...

If that were really true we'd have 100 different iPhone models made in all different combos of size, shape and materials, same with all other lines. Apple would be announcing their plans a year ahead of the release.

And would most definitely not be working on an aftermarket process since it brings in more money to force folks to buy at full cost.,
 
this is awesome.. i actually wrote an email to steve jobs a while go telling him that my father and i love to read on our ipads... however we cannot swap books the conventional way... he wants his ipad, i want mine... LOVE THIS IDEA
 
iGrip said:
Yet more DRM. Thanks but no thanks, Apple. I will continue to buy nothing from the iStore.
Click to expand...

So...you won't buy from iTunes when there's no DRM (like now), and if they add DRM for trading you won't buy from iTunes. Thanks for the update!


iGrip said:
Why should I split any revenue with Apple or the publisher when I sell my old books?

Do you have to give Chevrolet a cut when you sell your old car? If suddenly you had to sell your used car through Chevrolet's used car lot, and you had to split your money with them, would you be happy?

If not, then why does such an scheme with digital content make you happy?
Click to expand...

I'm curious, when you sell your books and cars, are you capable of making a 100% identical 'backup copy' first at no cost? That would make this a more interesting analogy.
 
iGrip said:
Yet more DRM. Thanks but no thanks, Apple. I will continue to buy nothing from the iStore.
Click to expand...

Call it what you want, just remember those items you buy are very likely licensed, not owned.
 
Only happy if it allows me to transfer content between my accounts. But since they are in different countries this might remain a dream. The above "step 340" will prevent, I'm pessimistically sure.
 
swarmster said:
So...you won't buy from iTunes when there's no DRM (like now), and if they add DRM for trading you won't buy from iTunes. Thanks for the update!.
Click to expand...

You may want to double-check your "no DRM now" contention. iStore content is locked down.


swarmster said:
I'm curious, when you sell your books and cars, are you capable of making a 100% identical 'backup copy' first at no cost? That would make this a more interesting analogy.
Click to expand...

Of course I can't do that. But that is irrelevant.
 
Seems everything is patentable these days.

Lucky no one decided to patent the idea of pressing a button to turn on a computer or anything back in the day.

Apple: Button
Another: Switch
Another: Shake the machine
The Rest: Plug in the cable
 
charlituna said:
If that were really true we'd have 100 different iPhone models made in all different combos of size, shape and materials, same with all other lines. Apple would be announcing their plans a year ahead of the release.

And would most definitely not be working on an aftermarket process since it brings in more money to force folks to buy at full cost.,
Click to expand...

No way. Apple chose the correct path to maximum total profits. Those gimmicks would not generate nearly as much profit in the long term compared with the masterful techniques that Apple has employed.

Your techniques were likely considered by Apple, and more likely rejected as being inferior. Nobody knew how to turn a buck like Steve Jobs.
 
Wow. This is the best news I've heard all month. :D

Coincidentally, I was just today desperately trying to hack the iTunes metadata for an app to transfer it to another account.

Hurry up apple, get this rolled out. :apple:
 
At first I loved the idea, but on second thought, this is very backward thinking... Publishers should love this however, because digital lending sets the paradigm of "sharing without copying" - and thus disabling a precious digital propriety of easy and cost-less multiplication... I think this is an attempt of really setting the public opinion on uniqueness of digital files, which is simply not true...

One way of embracing this great characteristic is motivating owners of the licensed files not to share illegaly by making them part of the distribution...Imagine following scenario: I buy an album and I make my friend like it. I can copy it for him device to device and he pays for it, but I get a cut... Why? Simply because the publisher's marketing or supply chain didn't move a finger to make that sale. I do their work for them and I should be rewarded... Todays piracy relies often on enthusiast that share their collections... What if the dilemma of making a penny legally out of it occured? Any thoughts?:)
 
iGrip said:
If the authors and publishers had their way, public libraries would be just as illegal as any other sort of distribution that they cannot make a profit from.

Look at the history of the First Sale Doctrine.

And you don't need additional DRM to lend your digital copies to your friend. Not yet, anyways. You are free to do so any time you wish, with no legal repercussions, no thanks to the authors and the publishers.

This new thing by apple will NOT increase your ability to do anything. It will only put additional screws into consumers.
Click to expand...

Although I suppose such a move by Apple could be used to provide further credence to the fact that these items are in fact not "licenses," but purchases, which was part of the issue in Vernor v Autodesk. Either way, we all know that the whole licensing thing is a sham.
 
iGrip said:
If you wanted to trade bubble gum cards with your friend, would you be OK paying a fee to Topps?
Click to expand...

If you bought, sold or traded through a Topps retail store, you would be expected to pay a fee, yes.

Using iTunes facilities to buy, sell or trade would be no different.

----------
iGrip said:
If the authors and publishers had their way, public libraries would be just as illegal as any other sort of distribution that they cannot make a profit from.
Click to expand...

The majority of authors and publishers have no issue with lending libraries, even digital libraries, who purchase the content that they lend, and limit lending to that content. Copying content for redistribution is a problem however.

----------
Jimrod said:
Dear Apple,

Rather than spending all day worrying about patents how about helping out existing customers of iDevices so they may just continue to buy the next generation? Two suggestions of things that have bugged the S@?* out of me lately:
Click to expand...
Very simple.

Patents protect your future ability to do something for your customers without paying someone ELSE a royalty.

You should be happy as an Apple customer that they understand this.

Applying for patents is not impacting their ability to deliver added functionality to their devices. We are not talking about a one man shop here where labor is limited....
 
Nothing beats buying physical media and avoiding unfair DRM and sale terms altogether. Mp3's are substandard. eBooks cost as much as physical books without the real experience. And who wants to tie up their expensive movie collection in any ecosystem?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back