211–220 of 403 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the download had no DRM, and I could freely copy it, I would have much more sympathy. Usually transfering to another machine is hard, or impossible.
Do files from itunes have drm on it these days? I thought waaay back in the beginning they did have it, but then at some point they went drm free. (At least fir music) At what point did they sworch back?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple can just rent you their entire catalogue similar to Apple Arcade or Music, then nobody would say you own the entire selection, just like it’d be absurd to say you own Netflix forever. In the Netflix case it’s be even more difficult to argue since Netflix doesn’t own the IP and the catalogue is ever shifting. I’m afraid the future is rental at least because the consumer is no longer technically prepared to own a…
I think this is easy to resolve. With Netflix, the terms are that you pay a fixed amount and you get one month's access to stream whatever they choose to offer at the time, repeat. If Netflix terminates your account, well, you lose out on less than a month of access, so they should refund one month. It's very different if (a) you pay per individual item, (b) there's an explicit or implied agreement that you have acce…
and finally, big tech will have caught on to the business model of late 90s early 2000s porn sites
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much should that digital content cost then? Make a DVD once, never think about it again. To offer digital copy that loses no value over time and must be available forever seems like a bad deal from the publisher's side. To offer a one time download code seems far more tenable.
There are lots of possible solutions: - Explicitly advertise that you're buying access to the content for x years, not buying it outright - Allow for non-DRM content download either as standard, or as a guaranteed backup option - If a company goes bankrupt, bankruptcy proceedings ensure that users' content licenses are transferred to another provider at no charge, funded with liquidation proceeds -- with priority ove…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously. It's well past time that Congress passes a law explicitly to that effect -- if you lose access to purchased content, whether because your account was terminated or the content was removed, you get 100% refunded. End of story. Any TOS to the contrary are invalid.
How much should that digital content cost then? Make a DVD once, never think about it again. To offer digital copy that loses no value over time and must be available forever seems like a bad deal from the publisher's side. To offer a one time download code seems far more tenable.
If you really want such a high level of control, then it accordingly comes with a high level of responsibility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, this would probably force them to treat purchase revenue as a liability on the accounting books.
Is that standard practice on physical products which have warranties? If not, then I do not see why it would be necessary here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are lots of possible solutions: - Explicitly advertise that you're buying access to the content for x years, not buying it outright - Allow for non-DRM content download either as standard, or as a guaranteed backup option - If a company goes bankrupt, bankruptcy proceedings ensure that users' content licenses are transferred to another provider at no charge, funded with liquidation proceeds -- with priority ove…
Whether it explicitly advertises buying content for X years is hardly relevant in this case. The issue is that Apple claims the right to shut it down at any time. If they promised 5 years and shut down the account after a month, the same issue would come up.
My original, root comment was already about the immediate issue with Apple.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are lots of possible solutions: - Explicitly advertise that you're buying access to the content for x years, not buying it outright - Allow for non-DRM content download either as standard, or as a guaranteed backup option - If a company goes bankrupt, bankruptcy proceedings ensure that users' content licenses are transferred to another provider at no charge, funded with liquidation proceeds -- with priority ove…
Whether it explicitly advertises buying content for X years is hardly relevant in this case. The issue is that Apple claims the right to shut it down at any time. If they promised 5 years and shut down the account after a month, the same issue would come up.
The reality is that most big tech companies want to get all the benefits of "going digital", while shifting all the costs or downsides of that move to the consumers. This is not accidental. This is a long-term strategy backed by an elaborate PR campaign. The campaign was so successful that most people aren't even aware of how bizarre the whole idea of "renting" digital content really is. You're "renting" something th…
This is only slightly less true for books and optical media. You are never paying for the paper or plastic - even on the lowest margins that's at most 10% of it - , you're paying for the privilege of consuming what's on it.
> How much of what you pay for "digital rentals" goes to creators and towards running the actual infrastructure to download/consume media?
If you look beyond the big players you'll find some people earn more (semi-)self-publishing on the internet than they'd have ever earned with a publishing deal. On-demand/low volume print and having digital as your default channel also made "real" publishing deals available to more people.
Being on store shelves was not actually that much better than Spotify for musicians accounting for volume, they just had less competition because now shelf space is unlimited.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously. It's well past time that Congress passes a law explicitly to that effect -- if you lose access to purchased content, whether because your account was terminated or the content was removed, you get 100% refunded. End of story. Any TOS to the contrary are invalid.
Unfortunately, this would probably force them to treat purchase revenue as a liability on the accounting books.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, this would probably force them to treat purchase revenue as a liability on the accounting books.
What's the problem with this ? I'm not familiar with accounting.
I suspect any law would state it has an availability period before refunds are not eligible.