And not ONCE did the thought occur to him to give her his password, or write it down for her, since she depends on it? Sorry, if he did not share it with her in life, then I don't see why Apple should share it with her after death. It has nothing to do with "compassion" as another poster stupidly posted. I wouldn't want Apple to give my family my Apple ID if they lobbied for it either. If I wanted them to have it, I would have given it to them.
If you do not want them to have it you stipulate this in your will. Otherwise it falls under your bequeathed possessions.
There will be an emerging body of law / precedent in IP-rights-after-death in the years ahead.
If my will explicitly transfers ownership of any digital content I own to someone (wife), and I provide that person with my User ID and password to any such content providers (e.g., iTunes), will the courts and publishers honor that -- acknowledging that actual ownership of the content has transfered to the new person?
Read the fine print of your agreements. You'll probably find that all you "own" is a non-transferable license allowing you unlimited use of the media - so my guess is "No" - you can't bequeath any of your digital content to another. However - having said that - if you're leaving your userid and password - why would the courts need to be involved - the person you left it to could simply log in and download copies of any digital content you actually owned.
To the best of my knowledge the content of wills become public information once they are read. It might not be wise to leave a userid and password in your will unless you are certain that someone will have the presence of mind to change your password immediately - lest your account be hijacked by a criminal - especially if there still might be a valid (shared) credit card attached to the account!
Well the fine print might be illegal in a lot of countries. In the EU non transferable licenses are against the consumer law (but is allowed in a business environment). I don't what is applicable in Canada
And not ONCE did the thought occur to him to give her his password, or write it down for her, since she depends on it? Sorry, if he did not share it with her in life, then I don't see why Apple should share it with her after death. It has nothing to do with "compassion" as another poster stupidly posted. I wouldn't want Apple to give my family my Apple ID if they lobbied for it either. If I wanted them to have it, I would have given it to them.
Well he did not give her the password for the house and the car, the death certificate was sufficient.
As soon as I read that she wrote Tim Cook a letter, I thought very well she would receive the password without having to go through the proper channels. Why? Because Tim Cook is a coward. And like any coward, he has shown willingness to sacrifice principle for the sake of compassion and to look like a nice guy in front of the media. I knew he was cowardly when he fired Katie Cotton and abandoned Apple's old PR practices created under Steve Jobs.
Apple received the man's will, death certificate and verbal confirmation from his wife. If his will stipulates that everything goes to his wife and/or daughter, that should include his digital legacy. There's also something here that Apple somehow forgot about: it's called compassion.
Apple employs hundreds of thousands of people worldwide. Like society in general, there are people with varying degrees of empathy, compassion etc. Apple isn't any different in this respect. This is just a case of one employee not showing any. Besides compassion can't be attributed to corporations, just people.
In many instances, digital rights can not be assigned through a Will or similar document. Even if the Will has that language, the assignment is not valid because of the terms of the digital rights.
I think this is why everything is moving toward a subscription model. You won't own software/music/movies/... just pay a monthly fee for access, when you die there's no transference of anything. Your spouse would just start their own subscription to the same media.
Right now I don't mind purchasing music from iTunes, since I can play those files on multiple devices from different manufacturers, and they don't go away if I can't afford a subscription.
In many instances, digital rights can not be assigned through a Will or similar document. Even if the Will has that language, the assignment is not valid because of the terms of the digital rights.
Terms of the digital rights can not overwrite laws of the land. In most countries you have to right to transfer ownership of digital media you have legally bought.
In many instances, digital rights can not be assigned through a Will or similar document. Even if the Will has that language, the assignment is not valid because of the terms of the digital rights.
Ha! Soon, instead of proving you have authorized access to the decease's iTunes account, you'll have to prove that the account holder is still alive! "Mrs. Smith, your grandfather's account is over 100 years old, we'd just like to confirm that he is still in good health and enjoying his leased, non-transferable media personally."
Apple received the man's will, death certificate and verbal confirmation from his wife. If his will stipulates that everything goes to his wife and/or daughter, that should include his digital legacy. There's also something here that Apple somehow forgot about: it's called compassion.
Apple received the man's will, death certificate and verbal confirmation from his wife. If his will stipulates that everything goes to his wife and/or daughter, that should include his digital legacy. There's also something here that Apple somehow forgot about: it's called compassion.
The AppleID is a contractual issue, different from the title on the house, on the car, or on the iPad. The heirs cannot automatically replace the deceased party of a contract.
As soon as I read that she wrote Tim Cook a letter, I thought very well she would receive the password without having to go through the proper channels. Why? Because Tim Cook is a coward. And like any coward, he has shown willingness to sacrifice principle for the sake of compassion and to look like a nice guy in front of the media. I knew he was cowardly when he fired Katie Cotton and abandoned Apple's old PR practices created under Steve Jobs.
what nonsense. if he were a coward, he wouldnt be the ONLY CEO to 1) come out of the closet. 2) stand up to the federal government on encryption.
As soon as I read that she wrote Tim Cook a letter, I thought very well she would receive the password without having to go through the proper channels. Why? Because Tim Cook is a coward. And like any coward, he has shown willingness to sacrifice principle for the sake of compassion and to look like a nice guy in front of the media. I knew he was cowardly when he fired Katie Cotton and abandoned Apple's old PR practices created under Steve Jobs.
what nonsense. if he were a coward, he wouldnt be the ONLY CEO to 1) come out of the closet. 2) stand up to the federal government on encryption.
He's been hiding in the closest for decades and only came out once a reporter outed him on CNBC.
what nonsense. if he were a coward, he wouldnt be the ONLY CEO to 1) come out of the closet. 2) stand up to the federal government on encryption.
He's been hiding in the closest for decades and only came out once a reporter outed him on CNBC.
You really think people in the valley, Jobs, the exec team and Apple didn't know... Oh my. Is out of the closet only when you disclose to the media... I don't think so by most definition of this. Most people don't go discussing their private life in public; he confirmed it when asked; that's it.
In many instances, digital rights can not be assigned through a Will or similar document. Even if the Will has that language, the assignment is not valid because of the terms of the digital rights.
Terms of the digital rights can not overwrite laws of the land. In most countries you have to right to transfer ownership of digital media you have legally bought.
The point you are missing is that nobody has legally bought the song. You have essentially rented the song and the rental period lasts from the time you pay for it until you die.
Perhaps they'll take it one step further and require your living spouse or heir to provide proof of deletion or the rental will start to incur overdue fees! /s
My point is that just because you think you've purchased something (the song), it doesn't mean that you have purchased it! You may just be purchasing the rights to listen to the song for a fixed period of time.
Comments
If you do not want them to have it you stipulate this in your will. Otherwise it falls under your bequeathed possessions.
Besides compassion can't be attributed to corporations, just people.
I think this is why everything is moving toward a subscription model. You won't own software/music/movies/... just pay a monthly fee for access, when you die there's no transference of anything. Your spouse would just start their own subscription to the same media.
Right now I don't mind purchasing music from iTunes, since I can play those files on multiple devices from different manufacturers, and they don't go away if I can't afford a subscription.
Is out of the closet only when you disclose to the media... I don't think so by most definition of this.
Most people don't go discussing their private life in public; he confirmed it when asked; that's it.
Perhaps they'll take it one step further and require your living spouse or heir to provide proof of deletion or the rental will start to incur overdue fees! /s
My point is that just because you think you've purchased something (the song), it doesn't mean that you have purchased it! You may just be purchasing the rights to listen to the song for a fixed period of time.