Disney Fixes Its Sketchy DVD Rental License, Wins Injunction Against Redbox Over Digital Downloads

3 09 2018

Tech Dirt

Mike Masnick

[ed’s note: we need no more evidence than this case to substantiate our claim that judges in the US court system have lost their collective memories from the contracts classes they took in law school. Apparently, not a one of them is willing to use common sense and legal judgment to mark terms of service and other wrap contracts as the crap that they usually are. Here, we have yet another stunning example of a judge sticking with bad precedent rather than pointing out the obvious and thereby bringing some wisdom into the void].

Tech Dirt

Mike Masnick

Earlier this year we wrote about Disney’s silly lawsuit against Redbox. If you don’t recall, Redbox, whose main business was renting DVDs out of kiosks started also offering digital download codes that could be purchased at their kiosks. What Redbox did, was it would buy Disney “combo packs” (that came with both a DVD and a download code) and would offer up just the slip of paper with the code out of its kiosks. This seems like perfectly reasonable first sale rights. A legitimate code was purchased, and then resold.

When we wrote about the case back in February, it involved the court smacking down Disney, and even saying that the company was engaged in “copyright misuse” in overclaiming what copyright allowed the company to do. . . .

So my prediction following that was: “this almost certainly means that Disney is quickly reprinting the packaging on all its Combo Pack DVDs to make this language more legalistic to match the Lexmark standard.”

And… bingo. That’s exactly what happened. In a new ruling, the court has now granted a preliminary injunction against Redbox all because of the new “contract” language Disney has put on its DVDs (though amusingly, in a footnote, the court notes “Disney does not concede that the changes were necessary.”)

more

The content in this post was found at https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180831/00545440550/disney-fixes-sketchy-dvd-rental-license-wins-injunction-against-redbox-over-digital-downloads.shtml Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com

Powered by WPeMatico



Update: Ninth Circuit Holds That CRRA Is Preempted by “First Sale Doctrine”

13 08 2018
Lex Blog
AUGUST 9, 2018
The Ninth Circuit recently issued its decision regarding the validity of the California Resale Royalty Act (“CRRA”) in three consolidated appeals: Close v. Sotheby’s, Inc., No. 16-56234, The Sam Francis Foundation v. Christie’s, Inc., No. 16-56235 and The Sam Francis Foundation v. eBay Inc., No. 16-56252. 2018 WL 3322222 (9th Cir. July 6, 2018).

The content in this post was found at https://www.lexblog.com/2018/08/09/update-ninth-circuit-holds-that-crra-is-preempted-by-first-sale-doctrine/ Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com

Powered by WPeMatico



Is There A Digital First Sale?

14 03 2018

Is There A Digital First Sale?

Above the Fold

The Copyright Act grants the owner of a copyright certain rights, including the right to reproduce, to distribute, and to perform and display the copyrighted work. 17 U.S.C. § 106. However, these rights are limited by other sections of the statute. One such limitation to the distribution right is known as the “first sale doctrine,” which states, “the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made [] is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord. Id. at § 109(a). For example, if you purchase a DVD at the store, you own a particular copy of a copyrighted work. You can resale the DVD, give it away, or destroy it without infringing the copyright owner’s right of distribution. The same is true for any number of copyrighted works fixed in a variety of mediums, e.g., a CD, cassette, vinyl record, book, photograph, art print, etc. But what about digital content? That is, can you resell a song or movie you lawfully purchase and download?

more

The content in this post was found at https://advertisinglaw.foxrothschild.com/2018/03/digital-first-sale/ Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.

 

Powered by WPeMatico



Misusing Mickey Mouse: The Fight Over Movie Download Codes

27 02 2018

Jetlaw

Barrett Lingle

In November, Walt Disney Co. sued Redbox in an attempt to stop the DVD rental company from selling digital copies of its movies. At the center of the suit are movie download codes that can be used to download a digital copy of a Disney movie and are included with a Blu-ray disc and a DVD in each “combo pack” Disney sells. Disney filed a motion for a preliminary injunction against Redbox after Redbox began disassembling the “combo packs” it purchased from Disney and selling the codes separately to consumers.

more

The content in this post was found at https://www.jetlaw.org/2018/02/13/misusing-mickey-mouse-the-fight-over-movie-download-codes Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post. and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com.

Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.

 

Powered by WPeMatico



Future of Libraries – Need First Sale for ebooks

16 12 2017

How will libraries hold onto ebooks and other digital files like mp3s so that readers and scholars in the future can still read them?  The current state of affairs relies on license agreements with publishers who in turn license to vendors, who in turn, license to libraries.  Hardly sustainable when files can and do disappear when either the publisher or the vendor no longer offer them.

Libraries rely on the right of first sale to lend print books, and need an analogous right in the world of ebooks and digital music. To that end, the American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries, the Association of Research Libraries and the Internet Archive filed a brief on Feb. 14, 2017 in support of Redigi, a company that sells used mp3 files to music customers.  The brief argues that an evaluation of Fair Use should consider the rationale of the First Sale doctrine, and other specific exceptions. It argues that enabling the transfer of the right of possession should be favored under Fair Use.

It is essential to libraries, and the term existential would not be too great a term to use, to be able to own digital files, and care for them via preservation and library lends (e.g. to one person at a time) just as they do with print.  Can readers count on books being available a year or two or five after publication? The existence of libraries has made this possible from their inception until now.

The flexibility of digital content allows for an endless array of licensing opportunities (e.g. multiple simultaneous users) which is mutually beneficial to both publishers and users.  It is not practical to rely only on first sale for library delivery of econtent. The two modes for libraries to acquiring ebooks, licensing and first sale are not mutually exclusive but mutually dependent.

 

more


The content in this post was found at https://fairuse.stanford.edu/2017/02/19/future-libraries-need-first-sale-ebooks/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.



Digital Resale & Copyrights: Why the Second Circuit Won’t Buy It

12 10 2017

In 2011, ReDigi Inc. introduced technology that effectively attempted to establish a secondary market for “used” digital music files, where owners who had legally downloaded music files from iTunes could sell the music that they no longer wanted.  In a nutshell, the system allowed the owner of a digital file to transfer the music to ReDigi’s cloud storage locker, from which ReDigi could then sell it to a willing buyer for a lower price than the cost of an “original” purchase from the iTunes Store.  When a sale was made, Redigi would retain 60% of the sales price, while the seller and artist got 20% each. Although the process of transferring a file from an owner’s personal computer to ReDigi required that it be reproduced on ReDigi’s server, the system removed the file from the owner’s personal computer as the file was moved.  Capitol Records, the copyright owner of many music files sold over the ReDigi system, sued ReDigi for copyright infringement, alleging that the company reproduced and distributed its copyrighted works without permission.

more

The content in this post was found at http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/10/11/digital-resale-copyrights-second-circuit-wont-buy/id=88965/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.



Future of Libraries – Need First Sale for ebooks

20 02 2017

How will libraries hold onto ebooks and other digital files like mp3s so that readers and scholars in the future can still read them?  The current state of affairs relies on license agreements with publishers who in turn license to vendors, who in turn, license to libraries.  Hardly sustainable when files can and do disappear when either the publisher or the vendor no longer offer them.

Libraries rely on the right of first sale to lend print books, and need an analogous right in the world of ebooks and digital music. To that end, the American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries, the Association of Research Libraries and the Internet Archive filed a brief on Feb. 14, 2017 in support of Redigi, a company that sells used mp3 files to music customers.  The brief argues that an evaluation of Fair Use should consider the rationale of the First Sale doctrine, and other specific exceptions. It argues that enabling the transfer of the right of possession should be favored under Fair Use.

more


The content in this post was found at http://fairuse.stanford.edu/2017/02/19/future-libraries-need-first-sale-ebooks/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.



Commerce Recommends Amendments to Copyright Act Statutory Damages Provisions

16 01 2017

Earlier today the U.S. Department of Commerce issued a report titled White Paper on Remixes, First Sale, and Statutory Damages, which recommends amendments to U.S. copyright law that would provide more guidance and greater flexibility to courts in awarding statutory damages. However, the Task Force has found insufficient evidence to show that there is a change in circumstance in the markets or technology that requires action on amending the first sale doctrine.

more

The content in this post was found at http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2016/01/28/commerce-department-recommends-amendments-to-copyright-act-statutory-damages-provisions/id=65490/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.



US carriers agree to unlock customers’ phones after pressure from FCC

17 12 2013
AT&T, Verizon Wireless, Sprint, T-Mobile, and US Cellular have “voluntarily” committed to unlocking customers’ cell phones once their contracts have been paid off. The wireless carriers will notify customers when their devices are eligible to be unlocked, “or automatically unlock devices remotely, for free,” the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) said today.While the agreement was described as voluntary, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler had told the carriers he would pursue regulation if they didn’t comply with his terms. A recent ruling by the Librarian of Congress meant that a consumer unlocking his or her own phone would be violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s anti-circumvention provisions. Today’s agreement should sidestep that by putting the onus to unlock on the carrier, although it doesn’t help consumers who are still under contract.

 

more

The content in this post was found at http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/12/us-carriers-agree-to-unlock-customers-phones-after-pressure-from-fcc/ and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.



The Supreme Court’s Kirtsaeng Ruling Is Good News for Consumers, but the First Sale Doctrine Is Still Doomed–Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley (Forbes Cross-Post)

26 11 2013

By Eric Goldman

Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, No. 11–697 (U.S. Supreme Court March 19, 2013).  Prior blog post of the Second Circuit ruling in the case.

In Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons ($JW-A), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that U.S. copyright law doesn’t restrict the importation of legitimate copyrighted works manufactured and sold overseas.  As a result, publishers cannot use U.S. copyright law to enforce their price discrimination schemes of pricing copyrighted works on a per-nation basis.

This ruling is a legal victory for U.S. consumers, who should see cheaper prices in the short run.  This ruling is also a win for museums, libraries and other institutional collectors of copyrighted works, who face less risk now when acquiring copyrighted works (especially those initially sold overseas).  Still, amidst the good news, it’s impossible to ignore the rapid and probably irreversible demise of copyright’s First Sale doctrine, meaning this legal victory is likely short-lived at best.

more

The content in this post was found at http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2013/03/the_supreme_cou.htm and was not authored by the moderators of freeforafee.com. Clicking the title link will take you to the source of the post.