5 ms·
You propose to peel back the first sale doctrine, stripping rights from consumers and give even more privileges to corporate publishers? Terrible idea.
by MichaelCollins 4y ago
You propose to peel back the first sale doctrine, stripping rights from consumers and give even more privileges to corporate publishers? Terrible idea.
- cinntaile 4y agoThat's not what I'm saying, please don't reply like this it's very tiring and against the guidelines. I'm saying it doesn't make sense that the authors and the publishers don't get any money after the book was bought once and then it can be borrowed an infinite number of times. The libraries should pay some sort of fee to compensate them. It doesn't reduce your consumer rights, you can still borrow the book from the library. You can still donate it to the library. You can still lend your book to your friends and family without paying for anything. That's how it works over here in the EU (I don't know how every library system works in each EU country), not exactly a place with less consumer rights than the US.
- ndriscoll 4y ago> I'm saying it doesn't make sense that the authors and the publishers don't get any money after the book was bought once and then it can be borrowed an infinite number of times. Why not? That's how everything else works, at least in the US. e.g. my local hardware store will rent to you a variety of tools (which they also sell) or even trucks. They don't need to compensate the manufacturer for each rental; they just buy it like anyone else would. Even Netflix got their start buying DVDs and mailing them to customers to rent. As far as I know they have no requirement to pay ongoing fees or establish a licensing deal to do that (and apparently they have better selection for dvd rentals because of that).