4 ms·

When you are sold the concert ticket you know you are buying it to only view at the one specific time and location. It is an event ticket. With a digital movi

When you are sold the concert ticket you know you are buying it to only view at the one specific time and location. It is an event ticket. With a digital movie, ostensibly buying lets you view it whenever you want wherever you want in perpetuity but that's not actually the case. We can use the term "buy" for digital movies if you actually are just buying a ticket that lets you view the movie however wherever and whenever the license specifies. But that information should be highlighted to the buyer otherwise it's deception.

vel0city 4y ago
> When you are sold the concert ticket you know you are buying it to only view at the one specific time and location. Do I know this? Are you assuming I bothered to read the ticket ahead of time? I bought a ticket to the Red Hot Chili Peppers 2022 Tour. I should be able to go to all the tour, right? Oh wait, you're telling me there's text on the ticket I should have read to understand it was only for one location and one evening? You really expected me to read all that legalese? > With a digital movie, ostensibly buying lets you view it whenever you want wherever you want in perpetuity but that's not actually the case. Ugh. I bet I would of had to read something to understand the limitations of what I was buying. I can't believe companies expect people to read about the things people buy these days, totally taking advantage of everyone by putting knowledge behind words.
- alexfromapex 4y ago
  Arguing that reading anything, even small amounts of information located directly on the ticket or receipt, is "legalese" is very reductive and seems to be coming from an emotional rather than logical argument. Event tickets are an established practice that is very familiar and straightforward to consumers and as another commenter mentioned is a false equivalence for several reasons. There is an actual legal concept of an undue burden and that is exactly what having to read through many pages of fine print is. If you don't actually own digital content it should be highlighted very clearly, while placing a minimal undue burden on the consumer. Otherwise, it's deceptive.
  - vel0city 4y ago
    I want to watch Top Gun: Maverick. I go to the Amazon Store page. https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B0B213HG4N/ref=atv_hm_hom_4_c_dR69uw_brws_2_2 https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B0B213HG4N/ref=atv_hm... I see "By ordering or viewing, you agree to our Terms[link to terms]" Huh maybe I should look at what I'm buying before I click checkout. https://www.primevideo.com/help?nodeId=202095490&view-type=content-only https://www.primevideo.com/help?nodeId=202095490&view-type=c... Hmm, what's relevant to this. Ah, Digital Content, generally. The Service may allow you to: (i) ignoring subscription talk (ii) ignoring rental talk (iii) purchase Digital Content for on-demand viewing over an indefinite period of time ("Purchased Digital Content") So obviously even "buying" the movie only gives it to me for an indefinite period of time. I wonder when it might not become available then. Let's scan more section headers to see if it talks about that. i. Availability of Purchased Digital Content. Purchased Digital Content will generally continue to be available to you for download or streaming from the Service, as applicable, but may become unavailable due to potential content provider licensing restrictions or for other reasons, and Amazon will not be liable to you if Purchased Digital Content becomes unavailable for further download or streaming. I don't get how this is an "undue burden" to read this before forking over $14. It is not fine print, the default styles render it pretty clearly on my screen but you can feel free to resize it to render however you wish. Its not a long document. It has obvious sections. The link to this document was a few pixels away from the Buy button on my screen and was easily visible. It took me less than a minute to understand what I would be buying if I clicked "Buy". They're not hiding this away behind some far away unrelated site or only giving you this after requesting it by mail with legal letterhead. This is pretty out there and open. To me, suggesting that people can't read this might as well be the same as arguing people shouldn't be required to read what's on the face of a ticket. The information is right there, it is not hidden in the slightest. > Event tickets are an established practice Maybe to you, but maybe I've never bought one before. If you're going by "event tickets have been sold for a while", well, so have digital movies with DRM that can make them unavailable. This isn't something that just came out this year, I bought a movie from Amazon Unbox sixteen years ago which had these limitations. How long does it have to exist before it is an "established practice"?
    - 4y ago

vel0city 4y ago

> When you are sold the concert ticket you know you are buying it to only view at the one specific time and location. Do I know this? Are you assuming I bothered to read the ticket ahead of time? I bought a ticket to the Red Hot Chili Peppers 2022 Tour. I should be able to go to all the tour, right? Oh wait, you're telling me there's text on the ticket I should have read to understand it was only for one location and one evening? You really expected me to read all that legalese? > With a digital movie, ostensibly buying lets you view it whenever you want wherever you want in perpetuity but that's not actually the case. Ugh. I bet I would of had to read something to understand the limitations of what I was buying. I can't believe companies expect people to read about the things people buy these days, totally taking advantage of everyone by putting knowledge behind words.

alexfromapex 4y ago
Arguing that reading anything, even small amounts of information located directly on the ticket or receipt, is "legalese" is very reductive and seems to be coming from an emotional rather than logical argument. Event tickets are an established practice that is very familiar and straightforward to consumers and as another commenter mentioned is a false equivalence for several reasons. There is an actual legal concept of an undue burden and that is exactly what having to read through many pages of fine print is. If you don't actually own digital content it should be highlighted very clearly, while placing a minimal undue burden on the consumer. Otherwise, it's deceptive.
- vel0city 4y ago
  I want to watch Top Gun: Maverick. I go to the Amazon Store page. https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B0B213HG4N/ref=atv_hm_hom_4_c_dR69uw_brws_2_2 https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B0B213HG4N/ref=atv_hm... I see "By ordering or viewing, you agree to our Terms[link to terms]" Huh maybe I should look at what I'm buying before I click checkout. https://www.primevideo.com/help?nodeId=202095490&view-type=content-only https://www.primevideo.com/help?nodeId=202095490&view-type=c... Hmm, what's relevant to this. Ah, Digital Content, generally. The Service may allow you to: (i) ignoring subscription talk (ii) ignoring rental talk (iii) purchase Digital Content for on-demand viewing over an indefinite period of time ("Purchased Digital Content") So obviously even "buying" the movie only gives it to me for an indefinite period of time. I wonder when it might not become available then. Let's scan more section headers to see if it talks about that. i. Availability of Purchased Digital Content. Purchased Digital Content will generally continue to be available to you for download or streaming from the Service, as applicable, but may become unavailable due to potential content provider licensing restrictions or for other reasons, and Amazon will not be liable to you if Purchased Digital Content becomes unavailable for further download or streaming. I don't get how this is an "undue burden" to read this before forking over $14. It is not fine print, the default styles render it pretty clearly on my screen but you can feel free to resize it to render however you wish. Its not a long document. It has obvious sections. The link to this document was a few pixels away from the Buy button on my screen and was easily visible. It took me less than a minute to understand what I would be buying if I clicked "Buy". They're not hiding this away behind some far away unrelated site or only giving you this after requesting it by mail with legal letterhead. This is pretty out there and open. To me, suggesting that people can't read this might as well be the same as arguing people shouldn't be required to read what's on the face of a ticket. The information is right there, it is not hidden in the slightest. > Event tickets are an established practice Maybe to you, but maybe I've never bought one before. If you're going by "event tickets have been sold for a while", well, so have digital movies with DRM that can make them unavailable. This isn't something that just came out this year, I bought a movie from Amazon Unbox sixteen years ago which had these limitations. How long does it have to exist before it is an "established practice"?
  - 4y ago