4 ms·

> It's not a license. It's a purchase of an item that becomes your own possession, and a law that covers what you can do as far as resale (also applies to book

by Closi 4y ago

> It's not a license. It's a purchase of an item that becomes your own possession, and a law that covers what you can do as far as resale (also applies to books). So once I sell it, if it's still on my hard-drive am I allowed to listen to it in your world? And if I have it but am not allowed to listen to it, what is that lack of playing-permission called if not 'not owning a license'? > It's not a license because it cannot be revoked by whoever sold it to you. Licences can be irrevocable, so this isn't a necessary property of a licence.

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
> So once I sell it, if it's still on my hard-drive am I allowed to listen to it in your world? I don't recall the precise case law that applies to CDs. There's certainly a version of things (probably the one desired by record companies) in which one or both of these is true (a) you can't rip it (b) you can't listen to the rips after you've sold it. Remember, methods of enforcing such a legal regime are distinct from the regime itself. > Licences can be irrevocable, so this isn't a necessary property of a licence. With networked digital technology, it is not always a matter of the legal terms of the license. If the playback mechanism requires contacting a remote server, whether you have a license of not does not matter if said server is no longer in existence. And sure, licenses can be irrevocable, but those connected with digital media, in general, have not been.
- Closi 4y ago
  I just mean that a lot of the chats in this thread seem to be saying “if we didn’t have licences, the alternative would be x” Where x describes a licence, just with different licensing terms.
LocalH 4y ago
> So once I sell it, if it's still on my hard-drive am I allowed to listen to it in your world? The same is possible with physical media. Analog media can be duplicated with varying levels of loss, digital media can be duplicated with no loss, and then the original item resold. Why must digital files be treated significantly differently, and suddenly DRM is required to even allow legitimate resale? If copyright owners had their way, they’d automatically get a blanket license to everyone’s content, while giving the individual person zero rights. The historical behavior of the industry (all the way back to Thomas Edison) indicates that this would be the case.

by Closi 4y ago

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago

> So once I sell it, if it's still on my hard-drive am I allowed to listen to it in your world? I don't recall the precise case law that applies to CDs. There's certainly a version of things (probably the one desired by record companies) in which one or both of these is true (a) you can't rip it (b) you can't listen to the rips after you've sold it. Remember, methods of enforcing such a legal regime are distinct from the regime itself. > Licences can be irrevocable, so this isn't a necessary property of a licence. With networked digital technology, it is not always a matter of the legal terms of the license. If the playback mechanism requires contacting a remote server, whether you have a license of not does not matter if said server is no longer in existence. And sure, licenses can be irrevocable, but those connected with digital media, in general, have not been.

Closi 4y ago
I just mean that a lot of the chats in this thread seem to be saying “if we didn’t have licences, the alternative would be x” Where x describes a licence, just with different licensing terms.

LocalH 4y ago

> So once I sell it, if it's still on my hard-drive am I allowed to listen to it in your world? The same is possible with physical media. Analog media can be duplicated with varying levels of loss, digital media can be duplicated with no loss, and then the original item resold. Why must digital files be treated significantly differently, and suddenly DRM is required to even allow legitimate resale? If copyright owners had their way, they’d automatically get a blanket license to everyone’s content, while giving the individual person zero rights. The historical behavior of the industry (all the way back to Thomas Edison) indicates that this would be the case.