if you buy mp3 files then you own them same as a CD and should have the exact same rights as you would with anything else you own, including ownership transfer.
If you license something then that implies you don’t own it and haven’t purchased it, but rather have purchased access rights to someone else’s property…there are a lot of grey areas with what you can do with access rights so long as the original property remains undamaged and intact. you are buying usage rights, and duplication is a form of usage, so it falls on contract law to limit usage scope, and contract laws vary country to country on whether they supersede usage rights.
the sleazy shift in several industries from ownership to licensing with no reason except extortion of additional money is a HUGE part of the problem and an attempt to circumvent ownership laws and rights at the expense of the consumer/purchaser.
It may not actually be necessary for the lawsuit to succeed to have its desired effect. Remember, earlier this year Congress asked for public comments on improving the DMCA anti-circumvention and exemption process. This lawsuit feels like one of the EFF’s goals is to apply pressure on the same issue by other means. Even if the lawsuit fails, it will still raise awareness (both public and Congressional) of the issue.
Agreed. Social and legal change generally requires consensus-building work over time. Civil, reproductive, worker, welfare and gay rights reforms all followed community organizing based partly on unsuccessful early attempts to remedy the injuries.
Early attempts help frame the issues and align community opposition to the abusive practice.
If the end result is the most important thing, then maybe the EFF should just start lobbying more aggressively. Pick out the politicians with the most influence and support them with sizable donations. If it’s effective, it might be much less expensive than a lawsuit as well.
