I agree with Bruce; a license, your kidding. iTunes might not be the number one seller of music surpassing Wal-Mart if everyone had known up front they were not purchasing the music. They were only being licensed to listen/view it; a tad misleading I would say, shame on you iTunes.
Itunes music is now DRM free. If somebody has a large collection and they wish to pass it on to their heirs, then they could just copy over all of the songs, and the heir can import the tunes into their own library, and they will now have access to it. That's what I would do.
Willis was apparently upset when he learned that he doesn't own the tracks he buys online, but is "borrowing" them under a license, according to the Daily Mail.
I agree with Bruce; a license, your kidding. iTunes might not be the number one seller of music surpassing Wal-Mart if everyone had known up front they were not purchasing the music. They were only being licensed to listen/view it; a tad misleading I would say, shame on you iTunes. Billy R Ramsey
Intelligent people knew. People who read the license agreement knew. People who paid any attention to the media knew. People with even a shred of common sense knew.
Actually, the latter is why it would spend a lot more than 10 minutes in court.
The First-sale doctrine overrides (exempts you from) any attempted contracts to block your ability to re-sell/transfer (distribute) something you have purchased. It is there to protect the consumer and prevent copyright owners from blocking a resale.
And when websites have links using terms such as 'buy', you really are creating an inferred sale, no matter what small print you tag on.
This would spend a long time in court... and I'm sure will one day.
Not when the agreement specifically tells you what rights you are buying. See below for the consequences if your interpretation were to become accepted.
[SIZE=14px]You and <span style="vertical-align:middle;line-height:22px;background-color:rgb(198,204,208);">jragosta</span> do realize that issue that is being discussed here is inheritance, not mass copies and giving them away for free or for money or whatever. There are actually several rights you have for example backing up or creating a copy of a file for personal use is one of them. First sale doctrine is also one of them. The issue here is what happens to someone's legally owned purchased digital files when they die. What record labels and apple are saying is that the music you purchased can't be transferred to someone after your death. No one is talking about making copies and giving them away for free or selling them, why you guys act like as soon as someone dies that the files are going to be mass copied and then sold or given away for free is unknown to me. The argument that is being made here is that when he or she dies, the digital file(s) he or she has on his or her computer should be allowed to cut and then paste on his or her heir's computer or whatever device they are using, now lets say Bruce has multiple copies one on his iphone, mac, ipod, ipad well than the copies would all have to be transferred to the heir, it can't be given out to multiple heirs, that is not in dispute. Again the argument is that Bruce buys a song off of iTunes and that song is on his mac, when he dies that song file should be allowed to be moved off of that computer, unless the heir gets computer, and onto the heir's computer, no one is saying make a copy and all other copies on the other apple devices either have to be transferred to the heir's devices or have to be deleted..[/SIZE]
First sale doctrine applies - IF you do not explicitly waive your first sale rights. I believe you do.
Originally Posted by jragosta
First, where's your evidence that people 'understand' it that way?
Second, even if they do, why should their misinformation override a license agreement?
It's called common knowledge that people understand it that way. I'm one of those that understand it that way and the other forum posters that support Bruce means they also understand it that way. Because if they don't change the agreement they will find that people will stop buying from the store.
So the fact that you're uneducated means that everyone else is?
Most people realize that when they "buy" software, they do not have the right to do whatever they want with it. I can't "buy" windows 7 and then make and sell 10,000 copies, for example. Similarly, most people who have ever thought about this at more than the "I want, I want, I want" level understand that their rights are limited - which would not be true if they owned it.
At the simplest level, if I owned music when I "buy" it, then I could demand that everyone else in the world pay me a royalty when they listen to it. Obviously, that doesn't happen - because I don't own the music.
And you haven't answered my second question. Even if the rest of the world is as uninformed as you are, why would that override a license agreement?
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 is far too short. There's a lot of music that's well over 20 years old that's still being played on the radio today.
The same thing is true of his movies. You do not buy the movie. You buy the physical media (DVD or BluRay) and a license to watch the movie for personal use only. In some ways, the movie license is more restrictive. If I buy a DVD in the US, I can not play it on non-US players. An iTunes track, OTOH, will work in any country where the music is licensed. Maybe we should all sue Bruce Willis because we can't watch his DVDs if we move to Brazil and buy a DVD player there.
What's with posting all the incorrect information?
iTunes tracks are only licenced for the country they are purchased in, and only if you are physically in that country. I have tonnes of DVD's and Blu-rays purchased from the US, and Europe, and they play fine on my NZ DVD/Blu-ray players, even Bruce Willis ones. The licence is very different to the ability to play the movie
We are able to "purchase" music and film on iTunes for very low $ precisely because it cannot be re-sold or given to others. In practice, it is highly unlikely that Mr. Willis' music and video collection would cease being available to his heirs, assuming that they maintain his iTunes account.
However, the IP rights (and financial security) of artists must be respected. The vast majority of musicians and actors only eke out a spare living from royalties. Mr. Willis, on the other hand, has had many mega paydays, and more are in his future. What is he thinking??
Hey, if your an actor that wants to get attention, just leak out a story that you are going to sue Apple, get some attention to sell tickets to an upcoming movie coming out.
So what movie is Willis coming out with? Hahahhahaha.
All he has to do is going out and buy a TON of writable CDs, let his kids at his computer for about a year, let them make copies of songs. No one will know the difference if they don't say anything.
NOT THAT I ENDORSE THIS PRACTICE, but it does happen,. They can make CDs all day long. What? You think that Apple is going to go snooping around their house for CDs they burned themselves from their Dad's system?
There's no way in the world that you'd have the right to own the music. Ownership implies the ability to resell, distribute, or do anything else with it. Someone like WIllis knows that. When you buy a DVD of one of his movies, you do not own the movie. You own the physical media with a license to use the content. That license is limited (you can not use it for a public performance, for example). The iTunes license is not significantly different. You own the physical media (your computer's hard drive) and a license to use the music. Just the same as Willis' DVDs.
Really? So why is it that anybody selling used CDs, DVDs, Software, etc. on Ebay is able to do it legally?
There's no way in the world that you'd have the right to own the music. Ownership implies the ability to resell, distribute, or do anything else with it. Someone like WIllis knows that. When you buy a DVD of one of his movies, you do not own the movie. You own the physical media with a license to use the content. That license is limited (you can not use it for a public performance, for example). The iTunes license is not significantly different. You own the physical media (your computer's hard drive) and a license to use the music. Just the same as Willis' DVDs.
Does this mean that when I pass away my entire collection of CDs, DVDs, Blu-rays, and software must be returned to the manufacturer or destroyed?
Maybe, but don't forget that Apple has a "Buy" button in iTunes, not a "License" button. The buy button is deceptive, and so would any statement such as that made by SJ on numerous occasions that in iTunes you buy a song because people like to "own" their music.
I don't know how Amazon portrays it, but I don't care because I don't buy from them.
Exactly what I think. If Apple had put 'License' button instead of 'Buy', then this would not have been a problem. Some commenters are saying this is a industry problem. IMHO, however, this is Apple's. And I believe anyone can see this.
Exactly what I think. If Apple had put 'License' button instead of 'Buy', then this would not have been a problem. Some commenters are saying this is a industry problem. IMHO, however, this is Apple's. And I believe anyone can see this.
EVERYONE in the industry says 'buy'. It's not just Apple's problem.
Heck, when you 'buy' a CD, you do realize that you're only buying the physical media and licensing the content, right? If not, you should.
Update: However, after the story began gaining attention, Willis'
wife, Emma Hemming-Willis, denied the rumor via Twitter. "It's not a true story," she wrote.
To all the me-first media outlets looking for a story, and all the folks who typed angry comments at Apple and had legal comment debates.... never mind!!! Hahahaaa!!! This would've been a great April Fools story/joke.
There's no way in the world that you'd have the right to own the music. Ownership implies the ability to resell, distribute, or do anything else with it. Someone like WIllis knows that. When you buy a DVD of one of his movies, you do not own the movie. You own the physical media with a license to use the content.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadmatic
Does this mean that when I pass away my entire collection of CDs, DVDs, Blu-rays, and software must be returned to the manufacturer or destroyed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Who ever claimed that? You really should lay off the strong stuff.
Then based on your first quote, what is to become of my media collection when I pass away?
So the fact that you're uneducated means that everyone else is?
Most people realize that when they "buy" software, they do not have the right to do whatever they want with it. I can't "buy" windows 7 and then make and sell 10,000 copies, for example. Similarly, most people who have ever thought about this at more than the "I want, I want, I want" level understand that their rights are limited - which would not be true if they owned it.
At the simplest level, if I owned music when I "buy" it, then I could demand that everyone else in the world pay me a royalty when they listen to it. Obviously, that doesn't happen - because I don't own the music.
It seems that you are confused about the difference of owning a copy of the media versus owning the licensing rights.
have to say i agree i buy 3-4 albums/movies a month not to mention apps and and to think when i go they just disapear into the either and cant be accessed by my son is insane. think i will have to start buying elsewhere and just transferring to itunes instead of buying from apple, until this whole mess is resolved.
No company gives you actual ownership of digital files. Even when you buy a music CD you don't own the files on it, all you own is the media that contain the files. You can however resell the CD itself with the music files still on it.
Everything you wrote is bullocks. You really think that when you buy The Beatles Abbey Road album that you own the rights to the song? Good one¡
I own what I have and can do with it what I wish so yeah. It's good. And I have that original album along with every beatles album and I listen to them when I want where I want and when I die, my kids will have the albums and can put them onto CDs and each have a copy to listen to. And who's coming to take those away? You?!? No one will. So bollocks to you, good sir. ;-)
Comments
Billy R Ramsey
Itunes music is now DRM free. If somebody has a large collection and they wish to pass it on to their heirs, then they could just copy over all of the songs, and the heir can import the tunes into their own library, and they will now have access to it. That's what I would do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Willis was apparently upset when he learned that he doesn't own the tracks he buys online, but is "borrowing" them under a license, according to the Daily Mail.
Viral bullshit!
(IMHO)
This is what's really sad about journalism nowadays. In the rush to be the first to report a news story, nothing is checked but put out there as fact.
Of course, then it is discredited and shown that it was fake.
Come on people. This is getting really old.
Intelligent people knew. People who read the license agreement knew. People who paid any attention to the media knew. People with even a shred of common sense knew.
Not when the agreement specifically tells you what rights you are buying. See below for the consequences if your interpretation were to become accepted.
First sale doctrine applies - IF you do not explicitly waive your first sale rights. I believe you do.
Originally Posted by jragosta
So the fact that you're uneducated means that everyone else is?
Most people realize that when they "buy" software, they do not have the right to do whatever they want with it. I can't "buy" windows 7 and then make and sell 10,000 copies, for example. Similarly, most people who have ever thought about this at more than the "I want, I want, I want" level understand that their rights are limited - which would not be true if they owned it.
At the simplest level, if I owned music when I "buy" it, then I could demand that everyone else in the world pay me a royalty when they listen to it. Obviously, that doesn't happen - because I don't own the music.
And you haven't answered my second question. Even if the rest of the world is as uninformed as you are, why would that override a license agreement?
20 years is far too short. There's a lot of music that's well over 20 years old that's still being played on the radio today.
Yet. They say that they're working on it.
What's with posting all the incorrect information?
iTunes tracks are only licenced for the country they are purchased in, and only if you are physically in that country. I have tonnes of DVD's and Blu-rays purchased from the US, and Europe, and they play fine on my NZ DVD/Blu-ray players, even Bruce Willis ones. The licence is very different to the ability to play the movie
We are able to "purchase" music and film on iTunes for very low $ precisely because it cannot be re-sold or given to others. In practice, it is highly unlikely that Mr. Willis' music and video collection would cease being available to his heirs, assuming that they maintain his iTunes account.
However, the IP rights (and financial security) of artists must be respected. The vast majority of musicians and actors only eke out a spare living from royalties. Mr. Willis, on the other hand, has had many mega paydays, and more are in his future. What is he thinking??
Hey, if your an actor that wants to get attention, just leak out a story that you are going to sue Apple, get some attention to sell tickets to an upcoming movie coming out.
So what movie is Willis coming out with? Hahahhahaha.
All he has to do is going out and buy a TON of writable CDs, let his kids at his computer for about a year, let them make copies of songs. No one will know the difference if they don't say anything.
NOT THAT I ENDORSE THIS PRACTICE, but it does happen,. They can make CDs all day long. What? You think that Apple is going to go snooping around their house for CDs they burned themselves from their Dad's system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
There's no way in the world that you'd have the right to own the music. Ownership implies the ability to resell, distribute, or do anything else with it. Someone like WIllis knows that. When you buy a DVD of one of his movies, you do not own the movie. You own the physical media with a license to use the content. That license is limited (you can not use it for a public performance, for example). The iTunes license is not significantly different. You own the physical media (your computer's hard drive) and a license to use the music. Just the same as Willis' DVDs.
Really? So why is it that anybody selling used CDs, DVDs, Software, etc. on Ebay is able to do it legally?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
There's no way in the world that you'd have the right to own the music. Ownership implies the ability to resell, distribute, or do anything else with it. Someone like WIllis knows that. When you buy a DVD of one of his movies, you do not own the movie. You own the physical media with a license to use the content. That license is limited (you can not use it for a public performance, for example). The iTunes license is not significantly different. You own the physical media (your computer's hard drive) and a license to use the music. Just the same as Willis' DVDs.
Does this mean that when I pass away my entire collection of CDs, DVDs, Blu-rays, and software must be returned to the manufacturer or destroyed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alonso Perez
Maybe, but don't forget that Apple has a "Buy" button in iTunes, not a "License" button. The buy button is deceptive, and so would any statement such as that made by SJ on numerous occasions that in iTunes you buy a song because people like to "own" their music.
I don't know how Amazon portrays it, but I don't care because I don't buy from them.
Exactly what I think. If Apple had put 'License' button instead of 'Buy', then this would not have been a problem. Some commenters are saying this is a industry problem. IMHO, however, this is Apple's. And I believe anyone can see this.
Originally Posted by hjb
IMHO, however, this is Apple's.
I can't think of any possible reason for you to think this. Not one at all. Nope…
EVERYONE in the industry says 'buy'. It's not just Apple's problem.
Heck, when you 'buy' a CD, you do realize that you're only buying the physical media and licensing the content, right? If not, you should.
Who ever claimed that? You really should lay off the strong stuff.
No. And I never said that they were.
Quote:
Update: However, after the story began gaining attention, Willis'
wife, Emma Hemming-Willis, denied the rumor via Twitter. "It's not a true story," she wrote.
To all the me-first media outlets looking for a story, and all the folks who typed angry comments at Apple and had legal comment debates.... never mind!!! Hahahaaa!!! This would've been a great April Fools story/joke.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
There's no way in the world that you'd have the right to own the music. Ownership implies the ability to resell, distribute, or do anything else with it. Someone like WIllis knows that. When you buy a DVD of one of his movies, you do not own the movie. You own the physical media with a license to use the content.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadmatic
Does this mean that when I pass away my entire collection of CDs, DVDs, Blu-rays, and software must be returned to the manufacturer or destroyed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Who ever claimed that? You really should lay off the strong stuff.
Then based on your first quote, what is to become of my media collection when I pass away?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
So the fact that you're uneducated means that everyone else is?
Most people realize that when they "buy" software, they do not have the right to do whatever they want with it. I can't "buy" windows 7 and then make and sell 10,000 copies, for example. Similarly, most people who have ever thought about this at more than the "I want, I want, I want" level understand that their rights are limited - which would not be true if they owned it.
At the simplest level, if I owned music when I "buy" it, then I could demand that everyone else in the world pay me a royalty when they listen to it. Obviously, that doesn't happen - because I don't own the music.
It seems that you are confused about the difference of owning a copy of the media versus owning the licensing rights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bboybazza
have to say i agree i buy 3-4 albums/movies a month not to mention apps and and to think when i go they just disapear into the either and cant be accessed by my son is insane. think i will have to start buying elsewhere and just transferring to itunes instead of buying from apple, until this whole mess is resolved.
No company gives you actual ownership of digital files. Even when you buy a music CD you don't own the files on it, all you own is the media that contain the files. You can however resell the CD itself with the music files still on it.
Says who? I'm not the one saying that you own the music when you buy a CD.
Whoever you leave it to gets it. The license for CDs is transferrable when you transfer the media.
What part don't you understand?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Everything you wrote is bullocks. You really think that when you buy The Beatles Abbey Road album that you own the rights to the song? Good one¡
I own what I have and can do with it what I wish so yeah. It's good. And I have that original album along with every beatles album and I listen to them when I want where I want and when I die, my kids will have the albums and can put them onto CDs and each have a copy to listen to. And who's coming to take those away? You?!? No one will. So bollocks to you, good sir. ;-)