Judge: MP3s May Not Be Resold

[sholling]

A federal judge in NY has ruled that legally purchased digital recordings may not be resold. I think the lawsuit was a big mistake because all it will do is seriously discourage buying legal music downloads and encourage even more illegal downloading and in the end the artists lose.

“Can I resell my MP3s?†redux—federal judge says no | Ars Technica

Courts have consistently held that the unauthorized duplication of digital music files over the Internet infringes a copyright owner’s exclusive right to reproduce. See, e.g., A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004, 1014 (9th Cir. 2001). However, courts have not previously addressed whether the unauthorized transfer of a digital music file over the Internet—where only one file exists before and after the transfer—constitutes reproduction within the meaning of the Copyright Act. The Court holds that it does.

 

[BMXTRIX]

Wow, what a stupid ruling! Guess I will just have to start giving them away.

 

[internetmin]

It's partly an indicator of how the tech and law are disconnected and that the tech is so far ahead.

So, for example, what if you sell a hard drive or an iPhone that has music on it that is not copy-protected? Did you sell just the drive or the music or both?

I would also be curious to see if the licenses for purchase are restricted to single ownership. For example, the apocryphal account of Bruce Willis wanting to challenge Apple to include all iTunes purchases in his will.

Can Bruce Willis leave his iTunes music to his kids? - CNN.com

and debunking the rumor:
Bruce Willis Isn’t Suing Apple Over iTunes Music Ownership Rights | TechCrunch

But the issue remains.