[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] Interesting 1st sale-shrinkwrap-EULA-(c)infringementcase
- To: Openlaw DMCA Forum <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Interesting 1st sale-shrinkwrap-EULA-(c)infringementcase
- From: Noah silva <nsilva(at)atari-source.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 16:36:30 -0500 (EST)
- In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
> No, think about it. What if "the problem" is software and music companies
> wrapping everything in a "rental agreement" and no sale ever taking place?
> Couldn't this really be consumer protection legislation?
> And if we consider that they MUST be bound by the first sale doctrine,
> then it's even more benefit to the public.
> Understand that rental is really just usury and is BAD for the
> public... that is to say, being able to rent a CD and NOT buy it hurts
This is true, but being able to rent it and/or buy it is a benefit.
You can rent movies, but you can still buy them.
You can rent CDs in japan, but easily still buy them. (though I might
mention they cost more, like $30 each, I don't know if that is a cause or
effect of the renting).
> They're out the money and, at the end of the rental term, are out
> the goods. It's exactly the evil we see in Microsoft's .NET (and the
> reason nobody's interested in getting on board).
How is microsoft planning to do this if the rental is illegal.
I might add that blockbuster also rents software.. all sorts of video
games. Is someone going to tell me that video games aren't software?!
As an aside, if the restriction [against rental] is in the first sale
doctrine, it would seem not to affect the origional owner.
-- noah silva