On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 19:28:06 +0000, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2013-03-22 15:36, anika200 wrote:
>> I got this notice yesterday, yay. I think this was the practiced normal
>> here in the US but of course copyrighters wanted a bigger slice of the
>>> The Kirtsaeng decision vindicates the foundational principle of
>>> “first sale” in copyright law: copyright owners only have rights on
>>> the “first sale” of their work. After that, you can lend, sell, give
>>> away, or trash a copy of a copyrighted work that you lawfully own.
>>> We believe that this is evidence that the conversation on copyright
>>> is changing, and people are increasingly recognizing the need for
> That’s interesting. I don’t know how that will affect, if it will
> propagate, to other countries.
> But technically, how can we “lend, sell, give away, or trash”, if the
> work is protected by DRM?
Usually, DRM’ed content is not only covered by a copyright, but also by a
license agreement of some sort.
For example, Penguin Books UK has the following terms in their agreement
(taken from http://www.penguin.co.uk/static/html/uk/ecommerce/
"26. In the case of eBooks, permission is granted to download a single
copy of an eBook to the installed reader on your computer for use by a
single user of that computer at any time, provided that:
(a) the eBook is not distributed or transmitted over any
network or communication line
(b) the eBook is used for personal entertainment only;
(c) the eBook is not copied or modified in any way;
(d) you do not remove any copyright or other proprietary
notices contained in the eBook.
This permission granted to you may not be transferred to a third party,
nor may you sublicense any of your rights under it.
This permission is effective until terminated. You can terminate it at
any time by destroying the eBook. It will also terminate automatically if
you fail to comply with any part of this Clause 24. You agree to delete
the eBook immediately on any such termination."
There may be some debate about whether such terms are actually
enforceable (licenses at least in the US are interpreted by the states
rather than at a federal level), but this does read (at least to me, as a
anything to do with copyright.
Though these terms arguably do not conflict with first sale doctrine -
“single user of that computer at any time” doesn’t mean it isn’t
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C