4 ms·

Has anyone tried a legal challenge to the word "buy"? It seems like a straightforward case of misrepresentation.

by josh_fyi 4y ago

ticviking 4y ago
I expect that such a case would be enormously expensive, and bankrupt one or both sides in the process.
PikachuEXE 4y ago
It's faster to build alternatives... There will always at least 2 (N) groups of people who agree/prefer Nth direction
netsharc 4y ago
There's probably wording in the agreement (linked next to the checkbox we automatically tick before clicking the button) that says you're buying a license to watch the movie as long as the movie is available on the platform. There are other definitions of buy a movie, e.g. buy the IP so you're allowed to make sequels.
- ticviking 4y ago
  The point of such a lawsuit would be to establish that a reasonable person thought they were “buying” it in the same way as a DVD, and the idea that it was time limited or could be unilaterally revoked was deceptively hidden.
- janzaib 4y ago
dfxm12 4y ago
I don't know if this is exactly the same thing, but this ruling from the EU, coming from reselling oracle licenses, comes to mind: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-07/cp120094en.pdf https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/201...
izacus 4y ago
That won't fix the core problem though - the platforms will just use another word for it and you still won't be able to take your content with you on a vacation or give it to your friends and family. It's a massive degradation of consumer rights you had guaranteed with physical media.
- dml2135 4y ago
  I think getting rid of the deception and forcing companies to be upfront about what they're selling would be a significant improvement. Hard to get companies to change when people don't even realize the problem.
  - hyperman1 4y ago
    'License' and 'EULA' basically do what you propose in the software world. They were a ploy to get more rights form 'buyers' than copyright allowed. It works so well that a lot of people think companies can't sell software without giving the right to unlimited copies, even if a book or dvd are trivial counterexamples. Basically the button 'buy' changes to license
- nicholasjarnold 4y ago
  Exactly this. Those of a certain age will remember the days when all media was physical media. People could purchase new, used or trade for a copy of this media. People had some amount of freedom regarding how they handle and/or distribute this media. It could be resold. A corporation could not immediately and arbitrarily decide to revoke your right to use the media or place many restrictions on _how_ you used it. While streaming media has some notable conveniences in certain cases, the downsides to the consumer seem to outweigh those benefits. It's as if there is a coordinated assault on ownership rights across many industries which is being led by the ubiquity of actually-broadband internet connectivity, the streaming technology that exists across many industries (gaming, movies, music and even general software) paired with corporation's insatiable desire for growth at all legal (even some not) costs. Because they now can, they will. As one who prefers freedom of use to maximum convenience I think it wise to purchase physical media when possible and back it up in a manner which is suitable to your long-term accessibility needs. Maybe I'm just a crabby old guy...
dqpb 4y ago
If you sue Amazon, can they ban you from using their services?
- wing-_-nuts 4y ago
  This sort of thing does have a chilling effect. I've had issues with Sony and google. With a physical store? I'd have simply done a chargeback. With my them? I'm basically guaranteed to be banned from their services. That sort of thing doesn't happen in physical stores. One doesn't get barred from walmart if you have a beef at the return desk.
EMIRELADERO 4y ago
Yes, check out the Andino v. Apple lawsuit https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18607418/andino-v-apple-inc/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18607418/andino-v-apple...

Has anyone tried a legal challenge to the word "buy"? It seems like a straightforward case of misrepresentation.

ticviking 4y ago

I expect that such a case would be enormously expensive, and bankrupt one or both sides in the process.

PikachuEXE 4y ago

It's faster to build alternatives... There will always at least 2 (N) groups of people who agree/prefer Nth direction

netsharc 4y ago

There's probably wording in the agreement (linked next to the checkbox we automatically tick before clicking the button) that says you're buying a license to watch the movie as long as the movie is available on the platform. There are other definitions of buy a movie, e.g. buy the IP so you're allowed to make sequels.

ticviking 4y ago
The point of such a lawsuit would be to establish that a reasonable person thought they were “buying” it in the same way as a DVD, and the idea that it was time limited or could be unilaterally revoked was deceptively hidden.
janzaib 4y ago

dfxm12 4y ago

I don't know if this is exactly the same thing, but this ruling from the EU, coming from reselling oracle licenses, comes to mind: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-07/cp120094en.pdf https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/201...

izacus 4y ago

That won't fix the core problem though - the platforms will just use another word for it and you still won't be able to take your content with you on a vacation or give it to your friends and family. It's a massive degradation of consumer rights you had guaranteed with physical media.

dml2135 4y ago
I think getting rid of the deception and forcing companies to be upfront about what they're selling would be a significant improvement. Hard to get companies to change when people don't even realize the problem.
- hyperman1 4y ago
  'License' and 'EULA' basically do what you propose in the software world. They were a ploy to get more rights form 'buyers' than copyright allowed. It works so well that a lot of people think companies can't sell software without giving the right to unlimited copies, even if a book or dvd are trivial counterexamples. Basically the button 'buy' changes to license
nicholasjarnold 4y ago
Exactly this. Those of a certain age will remember the days when all media was physical media. People could purchase new, used or trade for a copy of this media. People had some amount of freedom regarding how they handle and/or distribute this media. It could be resold. A corporation could not immediately and arbitrarily decide to revoke your right to use the media or place many restrictions on _how_ you used it. While streaming media has some notable conveniences in certain cases, the downsides to the consumer seem to outweigh those benefits. It's as if there is a coordinated assault on ownership rights across many industries which is being led by the ubiquity of actually-broadband internet connectivity, the streaming technology that exists across many industries (gaming, movies, music and even general software) paired with corporation's insatiable desire for growth at all legal (even some not) costs. Because they now can, they will. As one who prefers freedom of use to maximum convenience I think it wise to purchase physical media when possible and back it up in a manner which is suitable to your long-term accessibility needs. Maybe I'm just a crabby old guy...

dqpb 4y ago

If you sue Amazon, can they ban you from using their services?

wing-_-nuts 4y ago
This sort of thing does have a chilling effect. I've had issues with Sony and google. With a physical store? I'd have simply done a chargeback. With my them? I'm basically guaranteed to be banned from their services. That sort of thing doesn't happen in physical stores. One doesn't get barred from walmart if you have a beef at the return desk.

EMIRELADERO 4y ago

Yes, check out the Andino v. Apple lawsuit https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18607418/andino-v-apple-inc/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18607418/andino-v-apple...