I'm interested when listen the radio story about “Seller Beware”. As summary for this story was, Universal Music Group filed suit in federal court against California resident Troy Augusto, who makes a living selling used CDs on eBay. Universal, however argued that in this case Universal Music Group still owns those CDs and Augusto isn't authorized to make some profit on sell them. Keep in mind that someone who owned some stuff, so he or she has a right to do anything on this stuff. This property called physical property.
Back to selling CDs case, is fair Augusto will get punishment caused by his action to selling used CDs that his own? I agree with the Fred von Lohmann who is a senior attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation because he defending Augusto. He connected this case to the other similar case involved a novel entitled The Castaways. In that case, Marcy's was selling the novel for 89 cents a copy after brought the novel from a wholesaler fair. Marcy's said, that's my business and the copyright owner doesn't have control of that. The First Sale Doctrine lawsuit applied causing both sellers in the above cases get punishment. This law applied not only to copyright items that are sold but to those that are given away.
According to Lessig said that he worried about nowadays code enable creator to have full power on their product. I not really satisfy with the enclosure nowadays because it strikes the right balance. Is unfair for us to pay the money to the creator or authors to get permission to make some copy on it? I think is unfair because the owner hand have change from creator to us. I agree with Fred, Universal here is able to trump the First Sale Doctrine by putting a little label on a product that say" For promotional use only, not for sale" or in the above case, a label says" This CD for home use only". As we discussed in class about the copyright ©, there is permission culture for us to use and this is a clear sign to understand.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think "Seller Beware" is a great article to blog about in relation to intellectual property and privacy. I find it weird that Troy Augusto was sued for selling used CDs on eBay. Don't people do this all the time? I know I've bought used CDs before, whether it be at a garage sale or an actual used CD store, and I never thought of this as violating any property rights. I agree with what you say about that people own what they buy and therefore have the right to do whatever they want with their belongings, the physical property. If I buy a CD with my own money, how is it wrong for me to then go and sell it after I'm finished using it? I paid for it, and if I'm not able to sell it later on, then what exactly did I buy? I had never thought about this until now and find it so strange that someone would be sued for selling a used CD. I guess if I really think about it, it does sort of violate the creator of the music, because someone else is profiting from their work.
I think that this is one of the most interesting cases we have learned about this semester. Unlike most other cases where I can easily decide where I stand, I see a clear argument on both sides, and parts of me side with both parties. On one hand, it is the intellectual property of Universal and the artist, and no one else should be able to make a profit on their property without their permission. On the other hand, it is the physical property of Augusto because he bought it legally from Universal and he is not re-creating and distributing their intellectual property, but rather selling something that he now owns. If I sell a pair of old Nikes to a friend, could Nike sue me for selling their property? It seems very unrealistic that they could or that such a lawsuit could even be taken seriously. I’m not sure why different rules apply for intellectual property.
Post a Comment