Redbox Revokes Access to All Previously Purchased Content After Bankruptcy
1–10 of 10 posts
Re: Redbox Revokes Access to All Previously Purchased Content After Bankruptcy
#2ah the joys of legitimately buying content as opposed to being a criminal and an outlaw for pirating stuff.
Re: Redbox Revokes Access to All Previously Purchased Content After Bankruptcy
#3ah the joys of legitimately buying content as opposed to being a criminal and an outlaw for pirating stuff.
Vendors shouldn’t be allowed to call it “buying” if there’s no ownership assigned to the purchaser. Labeling the button “Rent Indefinitely” would be much more honest.
If first-sale doctrine doesn't apply to the transaction, I don’t understand how it can be called “buying”.
Re: Redbox Revokes Access to All Previously Purchased Content After Bankruptcy
#4Unless a digital purchase consists of a file or set of files that can be opened on any machine, without phoning home to check your subscription status, you're paying for thin air.
It's ironic because Redbox used to rent out DVDs that could be ripped to a file for a permanent, DRM-free copy.
Re: Redbox Revokes Access to All Previously Purchased Content After Bankruptcy
#5If buying isn't owning, then pirating isn't stealing.
Re: Redbox Revokes Access to All Previously Purchased Content After Bankruptcy
#6ah the joys of legitimately buying content as opposed to being a criminal and an outlaw for pirating stuff.
Vendors shouldn’t be allowed to call it “buying” if there’s no ownership assigned to the purchaser. Labeling the button “Rent Indefinitely” would be much more honest. If first-sale doctrine doesn't apply to the transaction, I don’t understand how it can be called “buying”.
I don't even think "Rent" is appropriate... I would prefer an actual "Lease" with some definitive terms of "at least N months" with a full refund if less than N months. Which could exceed N, but not less than. At least then it would be more clear with a debt path and holding requirement for the Lessor.
Re: Redbox Revokes Access to All Previously Purchased Content After Bankruptcy
#7[dead]
Re: Redbox Revokes Access to All Previously Purchased Content After Bankruptcy
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vendors shouldn’t be allowed to call it “buying” if there’s no ownership assigned to the purchaser. Labeling the button “Rent Indefinitely” would be much more honest. If first-sale doctrine doesn't apply to the transaction, I don’t understand how it can be called “buying”.
I don't even think "Rent" is appropriate... I would prefer an actual "Lease" with some definitive terms of "at least N months" with a full refund if less than N months. Which could exceed N, but not less than. At least then it would be more clear with a debt path and holding requirement for the Lessor.
Renting and leasing are the same thing. Renting is colloquially used for shorter periods of time, and/or more lenient cancelation terms prior to the rental term ending.
In the context of everyday consumer purchases, renting is simpler to understand.
Re: Redbox Revokes Access to All Previously Purchased Content After Bankruptcy
#9If buying isn't owning, then pirating isn't stealing.
[deleted]
Re: Redbox Revokes Access to All Previously Purchased Content After Bankruptcy
#10If buying isn't owning, then pirating isn't stealing.
Indeed. If I had bought things that were disabled, I'd pirate them with impunity.