I remember when Apple was obligated to replace a text on app download button from “free” to “get”, because many apps are free of price to download but make money by in-app purchaces.
Maybe we could do something like that for streaming services.
Comment on Sony Steals Customers' Purchased Content - Piracy is COMPLETELY JUSTIFIED!
arc@lemm.ee 9 months ago
The problem here is people didn’t buy content. They’ve bought a license to view content and somewhere in the smallprint is Sony’s right to revoke the right whenever they like for whatever reason. Other services have done likewise, either withdrawing content or just failing altogether.
So first off, as a consumer stop buying DRM’d shit because it won’t end well under any circumstances. Second, lobby for digital property to have rights akin to physical property so the right to destroy, lend, sell, or donate it is inherent to a purchase. e.g. maybe a purchase gives you a token and a signed / watermarked file in a playable format. And incentivize providers to sell digital property by taxing services that impose DRM to create a favourable price disparity.
smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de 9 months ago
calypsopub@lemmy.world 9 months ago
We really need to add textbooks into that. It’s absolutely a crime to charge hundreds of dollars for a book that cannot be resold.
arc@lemm.ee 9 months ago
IMO textbooks, at least in schools should just be given away in electronic form. I live in Ireland where parents have to buy physical copies from a retailer and it’s just stupid duplication of effort and a waste of money.
snaggen@programming.dev 9 months ago
No, what you describe is called “Rent” or “Lease”. People who press a “Buy” button and buy something, expect to own it. Words have a meaning, and trying to wiggle around this with fine print should be considered fraudulent.
EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 9 months ago
No, he’s right. You are buying something, but what you’re missing is that you’re not buying the content itself. You’re buying the right to access the content for an indeterminate amount on time. You’re not renting in the same way that buying a movie ticket isn’t renting. The thing you’re buying is just inherently temporary, and that’s the problem.
Aceticon@lemmy.world 9 months ago
It’s not “buy” by itself, it’s “buy a film” or “buy a TV series”.
The word “buy” followed by the name of a service (say, “access to films”) can indeed carry the meaning you describe (so in that example “buy access to films” is the same as “renting films”) even if it is an unusual wording, however when the word “buy” is followed by the name of a good, not a service, (i.e. “buy a film”) it is interpreted in trade, legal and common terms as acquiring ownership rights to that good.
Granted, IP law is a big bloody mess and Consumer Rights in places like the US are pretty much Fuck-You-Plebe, so legally in the US who knows what levels of misleading contractual terms and post-sale of contractual terms via EULAs towards retail customers are legal, but in both common usage and trade, in pretty much all areas but those covered by IP Law, “buy a good” means buying a product, which is something else altogether than “buy temporary access to a good”.
EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Thats why you’ll never see “The word buy followed by the name of a good”. In fact, you probably won’t even see the word “buy”. Most commonly you’ll see “add to cart” and then “check out”. Which are coincidentally the same words you’ll see when buying a movie ticket.
arc@lemm.ee 9 months ago
People are buying something - a revocable license to view content through the service. Look at the T&Cs of any of these services and it’ll say as much within that wall of text.
Hence why I advocate for digital property, a token of ownership and rights that go with it.
snaggen@programming.dev 9 months ago
If I give you the impression that you buy a gold bar, but in reality you get a cheap gold plated metal bar, then that is fraud. It doesn’t matter if it looks and feel the same.
arc@lemm.ee 9 months ago
That may be but it’s what these services are doing and will continue to do until lawmakers enact digital property laws along the lines that I suggest.
zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 months ago
I would have more sympathy for that argument if the same was applied to the government regulating land and taxes. It ain’t your land or your money, you have it on lease from the government so stop bitching and render unto Caesar.