I agree with Bruce. I have three books purchased by my grandparents in the late 1800, a couple of Mark Twain's Books and they're mine. I didn't lose them after they passed away. I currently have 87 digital books via Barnes and Noble and my Nook Color
This is not an Apple issue its an industry issue. I say we are due for a Class Action Suit. If we buy digital copies(music, books, periodicals) we have the right to keep them.
This is a very important issue. As the world begins to take more responsibility for our environment (Green Effort Movement) they will continue to push for the digital option.
And purchasing a digital copy should imply full ownership and it should be transferable to ones family/friends or your local University.
The bolded part says that you're wrong. Personal use does not involve giving something way.
The only possible argument that he might have is first use doctrine, but I believe that is waived in the EULA. The courts have upheld EULA agreements (see Psystar, for example).
Personal use has always included the ability to give away your single copy of whatever it is that you bought to anyone you choose. Also, passing something by will or devise is not exactly giving something away to the extent that it is a formalized transfer of property rights.
I fail to see how that is proof that Apple cannot do it. It's proof YOU cannot do it. Now. But says nothing about their ability to do it.
Then schedule a genius appointment and get back to us with the results.
I didn't say it wasn't technically possible. I said Apple can't do it. Either due to legal reasons or for fear of a MobileMe-style fallout, we may never know, but we know they can't make it happen.
When I realized what had happened, I contacted Apple support again, asking if they could merge my accounts. The answer I was given was not just "no" but 'absolutely not, under any circumstances ever.' While I am paraphrasing the support rep's response, that captures the spirit of it. I asked nicely, I complained, I sent separate requests hoping to get someone else, and I have asked again periodically whenever it occurred to me to do so. The answer remains a resolute and unwavering "no."
So be sure to get back to us when you see some progress on merging Apple IDs.
As a practical matter he could take his Apple ID/password and will that to an individual. Playing music files (and movies) from that account would be subject to the "5 computer rule" so could be legally be played on other computers. Or, if one converts the 256K Purchased AAC music file to 256K AAC (losing a very small amount of music info in the process) it appears to wipe the file of account identifying tags. As I understand it neither is probably allowed by the user agreement but how (or why) are they going to check? What is allowed, though cumbersome, is creating music CD's from the Purchased AAC files. You could certainly give those to your heirs. If one isn't worried about legal (since DRM went away) there is no technical reason a Purchased AAC file (with the identifying account info intact) can't be played on any computer.
Seems to me the "freezing the account" threat is for those who are stupid enough to disseminate copies on file sharing servers with their names still attached. And why would I worry about my account being frozen if I'm dead?
I think those who question whether the kids would even want the music are most on the mark.
I didn't say it wasn't technically possible. I said Apple can't do it. Either due to legal reasons or for fear of a MobileMe-style fallout, we may never know, but we know they can't make it happen.
Of course they can't. Just like they can't make a phone and can't get the music labels to agree to digital sales, much less DRM-free files.
Bruce, respectfully, that is an uninformed stance. We as listeners do not own the songs/product. The ownership belongs to the songwriter/composer &/ or record label. You and the general public must realize musicians, composers, songwritersetc do this for a living. It really comes down to artists getting paid for their work. It is not Apple (not that I think Apple is generous to artists-they are not! ) Income is already abysmally poor in this digital download environment for most artists even the very accomplished ones. This would further reduce the income for singer/songwriters, instrumentalists, composers, producers, studios and the like which it has already done. This would further erode the creative flow of wonderful music which it also has already done and continues to do. Our population, especially the young folks think that music is free. Well, it is not and should not be, this is how artists make a living! Do you really think that $.99 per song is expensive? What do you think the artist collects after a $.99 per download? The answer is not much! It varies according to the artist of course. We already have incredible rights whether legal or not - people do with it what they will. Nobody is policing this! Hundreds of thousands of people download, copy, steal, share, send, burn some more, give away. This is killing the "good music" business!
Artists (especially in great numbers) are hanging by a thread. It is necessary to protect what is left. You must realize how difficult it is to make a living wage as an artist. If you were playing the guitar and singing for a living ie: paying your mortgage, all your bills & continuing the wonderful life style that you have I think you would change your attitude. I respectfully disagree with your stance on suing apple for not allowing you to pass on your music collection. I know what I am talking about, I have been a performing artist my entire life.
Of course they can't. Just like they can't make a phone and can't get the music labels to agree to digital sales, much less DRM-free files.
Be sure to get back to us when you make some progress on that front. All the information I have says it won't happen. Short-sighted, really, to make everyone create all these new iCloud accounts that can't be linked back to their most loyal customers' original Apple IDs, but Apple is like that sometimes.
Be sure to get back to us when you make some progress on that front.
I don't work for Apple in their licensing and deals department. It's not for me to make any progress in this regard whatsoever. Stop pretending it has anything to do with me, or you, for that matter.
All the information I have says it won't happen. Short-sighted, really, to make everyone create all these new iCloud accounts that can't be linked back to their most loyal customers' original Apple IDs, but Apple is like that sometimes.
All the information we had said they'd never make an MP3 player or phone. Short-sighted, really, for you to think that something that isn't physically impossible would be operationally impossible should Apple decide to do it.
Bruce, respectfully, that is an uninformed stance. We as listeners do not own the songs/product. The ownership belongs to the songwriter/composer &/ or record label. You and the general public must realize musicians, composers, songwritersetc do this for a living. It really comes down to artists getting paid for their work. It is not Apple (not that I think Apple is generous to artists-they are not! ) Income is already abysmally poor in this digital download environment for most artists even the very accomplished ones. This would further reduce the income for singer/songwriters, instrumentalists, composers, producers, studios and the like which it has already done. This would further erode the creative flow of wonderful music which it also has already done and continues to do. Our population, especially the young folks think that music is free. Well, it is not and should not be, this is how artists make a living! Do you really think that $.99 per song is expensive? What do you think the artist collects after a $.99 per download? The answer is not much! It varies according to the artist of course. We already have incredible rights whether legal or not - people do with it what they will. Nobody is policing this! Hundreds of thousands of people download, copy, steal, share, send, burn some more, give away. This is killing the "good music" business!
Artists (especially in great numbers) are hanging by a thread. It is necessary to protect what is left. You must realize how difficult it is to make a living wage as an artist. If you were playing the guitar and singing for a living ie: paying your mortgage, all your bills & continuing the wonderful life style that you have I think you would change your attitude. I respectfully disagree with your stance on suing apple for not allowing you to pass on your music collection. I know what I am talking about, I have been a performing artist my entire life.
Respectfully submitted,
Dave
Dave, I have passed on you letter to Bruce and he would like to say several things in response:
1. He understands the concept of artists making a living by being paid (handsomely) for their creative work; in fact, he's all for it;
2. He agrees that paying $.99 for a copy of a song is not unduly burdensome;
3. Passing on his single copies of his songs to his daughters will in no way harm the artist's economic prospects.
I don't work for Apple in their licensing and deals department. It's not for me to make any progress in this regard whatsoever. Stop pretending it has anything to do with me, or you, for that matter.
All the information we had said they'd never make an MP3 player or phone. Short-sighted, really, for you to think that something that isn't physically impossible would be operationally impossible should Apple decide to do it.
Magnanimous of you, really, to assume Apple is going to suddenly fix a problem they themselves created almost a year and a half ago (It's been the first question in their iCloud ID FAQ for almost a year), but have steadfastly ignored ever since.
You're entitled to your opinion that Apple could fix this and that a fix is around the corner just as soon as they make it a priority, but I haven't seen any evidence any of this can or will take place.
Maybe you could head over to this thread on the Apple support forum and spread the good cheer that Apple can accomplish anything, once they put their minds to it?
Comments
I agree with Bruce. I have three books purchased by my grandparents in the late 1800, a couple of Mark Twain's Books and they're mine. I didn't lose them after they passed away. I currently have 87 digital books via Barnes and Noble and my Nook Color
This is not an Apple issue its an industry issue. I say we are due for a Class Action Suit. If we buy digital copies(music, books, periodicals) we have the right to keep them.
This is a very important issue. As the world begins to take more responsibility for our environment (Green Effort Movement) they will continue to push for the digital option.
And purchasing a digital copy should imply full ownership and it should be transferable to ones family/friends or your local University.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
The bolded part says that you're wrong. Personal use does not involve giving something way.
The only possible argument that he might have is first use doctrine, but I believe that is waived in the EULA. The courts have upheld EULA agreements (see Psystar, for example).
Personal use has always included the ability to give away your single copy of whatever it is that you bought to anyone you choose. Also, passing something by will or devise is not exactly giving something away to the extent that it is a formalized transfer of property rights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I fail to see how that is proof that Apple cannot do it. It's proof YOU cannot do it. Now. But says nothing about their ability to do it.
Then schedule a genius appointment and get back to us with the results.
I didn't say it wasn't technically possible. I said Apple can't do it. Either due to legal reasons or for fear of a MobileMe-style fallout, we may never know, but we know they can't make it happen.
TUAW's TJ Luoma was told:
Quote:
When I realized what had happened, I contacted Apple support again, asking if they could merge my accounts. The answer I was given was not just "no" but 'absolutely not, under any circumstances ever.' While I am paraphrasing the support rep's response, that captures the spirit of it. I asked nicely, I complained, I sent separate requests hoping to get someone else, and I have asked again periodically whenever it occurred to me to do so. The answer remains a resolute and unwavering "no."
So be sure to get back to us when you see some progress on merging Apple IDs.
As a practical matter he could take his Apple ID/password and will that to an individual. Playing music files (and movies) from that account would be subject to the "5 computer rule" so could be legally be played on other computers. Or, if one converts the 256K Purchased AAC music file to 256K AAC (losing a very small amount of music info in the process) it appears to wipe the file of account identifying tags. As I understand it neither is probably allowed by the user agreement but how (or why) are they going to check? What is allowed, though cumbersome, is creating music CD's from the Purchased AAC files. You could certainly give those to your heirs. If one isn't worried about legal (since DRM went away) there is no technical reason a Purchased AAC file (with the identifying account info intact) can't be played on any computer.
Seems to me the "freezing the account" threat is for those who are stupid enough to disseminate copies on file sharing servers with their names still attached. And why would I worry about my account being frozen if I'm dead?
I think those who question whether the kids would even want the music are most on the mark.
Originally Posted by John.B
I didn't say it wasn't technically possible. I said Apple can't do it. Either due to legal reasons or for fear of a MobileMe-style fallout, we may never know, but we know they can't make it happen.
Of course they can't. Just like they can't make a phone and can't get the music labels to agree to digital sales, much less DRM-free files.
Good luck, I think he's totally right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B
Can you rip MP3s from that album for your computer/iPod/iPhone and still legally give the CD away? Without deleting the MP3s?
No, and nobody is asking for that. You would need to delete them, which is reasonable.
There is only one word that defines this behavior of the music industry: theft. Besides this one:
The Mickey Mouse law ("The Mickey Mouse Protection Act") is not fair:
Copyright Term Extension Act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act
The copyright should be void no longer than 20 years, at most, after publication, like patents (not never, like now).
The court & lawyers' fees will probably be more than buying the same songs three times over...
Originally Posted by zunx
There is only one word that defines this behavior of the music industry: theft. Besides this one:
The Mickey Mouse law ("The Mickey Mouse Protection Act") is not fair:
Copyright Term Extension Act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act
The copyright should be void no longer than 20 years, at most, after publication, like patents (not never, like now).
20 years, no. Too short. Infinity minus one (like it is now), also no.
Dear Bruce Willis,
Bruce, respectfully, that is an uninformed stance. We as listeners do not own the songs/product. The ownership belongs to the songwriter/composer &/ or record label. You and the general public must realize musicians, composers, songwriters etc do this for a living. It really comes down to artists getting paid for their work. It is not Apple (not that I think Apple is generous to artists-they are not! ) Income is already abysmally poor in this digital download environment for most artists even the very accomplished ones. This would further reduce the income for singer/songwriters, instrumentalists, composers, producers, studios and the like which it has already done. This would further erode the creative flow of wonderful music which it also has already done and continues to do. Our population, especially the young folks think that music is free. Well, it is not and should not be, this is how artists make a living! Do you really think that $.99 per song is expensive? What do you think the artist collects after a $.99 per download? The answer is not much! It varies according to the artist of course. We already have incredible rights whether legal or not - people do with it what they will. Nobody is policing this! Hundreds of thousands of people download, copy, steal, share, send, burn some more, give away. This is killing the "good music" business!
Artists (especially in great numbers) are hanging by a thread. It is necessary to protect what is left. You must realize how difficult it is to make a living wage as an artist. If you were playing the guitar and singing for a living ie: paying your mortgage, all your bills & continuing the wonderful life style that you have I think you would change your attitude. I respectfully disagree with your stance on suing apple for not allowing you to pass on your music collection. I know what I am talking about, I have been a performing artist my entire life.
Respectfully submitted,
Dave
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Of course they can't. Just like they can't make a phone and can't get the music labels to agree to digital sales, much less DRM-free files.
Be sure to get back to us when you make some progress on that front. All the information I have says it won't happen. Short-sighted, really, to make everyone create all these new iCloud accounts that can't be linked back to their most loyal customers' original Apple IDs, but Apple is like that sometimes.
Apparently the story isn't true.
Originally Posted by John.B
Be sure to get back to us when you make some progress on that front.
I don't work for Apple in their licensing and deals department. It's not for me to make any progress in this regard whatsoever. Stop pretending it has anything to do with me, or you, for that matter.
All the information I have says it won't happen. Short-sighted, really, to make everyone create all these new iCloud accounts that can't be linked back to their most loyal customers' original Apple IDs, but Apple is like that sometimes.
All the information we had said they'd never make an MP3 player or phone. Short-sighted, really, for you to think that something that isn't physically impossible would be operationally impossible should Apple decide to do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Tofani
Dear Bruce Willis,
Bruce, respectfully, that is an uninformed stance. We as listeners do not own the songs/product. The ownership belongs to the songwriter/composer &/ or record label. You and the general public must realize musicians, composers, songwriters etc do this for a living. It really comes down to artists getting paid for their work. It is not Apple (not that I think Apple is generous to artists-they are not! ) Income is already abysmally poor in this digital download environment for most artists even the very accomplished ones. This would further reduce the income for singer/songwriters, instrumentalists, composers, producers, studios and the like which it has already done. This would further erode the creative flow of wonderful music which it also has already done and continues to do. Our population, especially the young folks think that music is free. Well, it is not and should not be, this is how artists make a living! Do you really think that $.99 per song is expensive? What do you think the artist collects after a $.99 per download? The answer is not much! It varies according to the artist of course. We already have incredible rights whether legal or not - people do with it what they will. Nobody is policing this! Hundreds of thousands of people download, copy, steal, share, send, burn some more, give away. This is killing the "good music" business!
Artists (especially in great numbers) are hanging by a thread. It is necessary to protect what is left. You must realize how difficult it is to make a living wage as an artist. If you were playing the guitar and singing for a living ie: paying your mortgage, all your bills & continuing the wonderful life style that you have I think you would change your attitude. I respectfully disagree with your stance on suing apple for not allowing you to pass on your music collection. I know what I am talking about, I have been a performing artist my entire life.
Respectfully submitted,
Dave
Dave, I have passed on you letter to Bruce and he would like to say several things in response:
1. He understands the concept of artists making a living by being paid (handsomely) for their creative work; in fact, he's all for it;
2. He agrees that paying $.99 for a copy of a song is not unduly burdensome;
3. Passing on his single copies of his songs to his daughters will in no way harm the artist's economic prospects.
Double thanks. First, for linking to someone saying it's not true, and a second thanks for linking to a page with a pic of a hot chick.
LOL. I'm sure Zune Pass and RIM's PlayBook music store will sue Willis if he doesn't sue them. They're jealous its always iTunes this and Apple that.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Double thanks. First, for linking to someone saying it's not true, and a second thanks for linking to a page with a pic of a hot chick.
That's his wife, isn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I don't work for Apple in their licensing and deals department. It's not for me to make any progress in this regard whatsoever. Stop pretending it has anything to do with me, or you, for that matter.
All the information we had said they'd never make an MP3 player or phone. Short-sighted, really, for you to think that something that isn't physically impossible would be operationally impossible should Apple decide to do it.
Magnanimous of you, really, to assume Apple is going to suddenly fix a problem they themselves created almost a year and a half ago (It's been the first question in their iCloud ID FAQ for almost a year), but have steadfastly ignored ever since.
You're entitled to your opinion that Apple could fix this and that a fix is around the corner just as soon as they make it a priority, but I haven't seen any evidence any of this can or will take place.
Maybe you could head over to this thread on the Apple support forum and spread the good cheer that Apple can accomplish anything, once they put their minds to it?
Originally Posted by John.B
…a problem they themselves created almost a year and a half ago…
Never heard of .Mac or iTools, huh?
(It's been the first question in their iCloud ID FAQ for almost a year), but have steadfastly ignored ever since.
Could you please actually try to understand what I'm telling you, or is that too much to ask? Don't bother answering; we already know.