Re: [mb-users] Are different digital downloads different releases?

Hello,

On 01/08/2013 10:08 PM, Jazzy Jarilith wrote:
> I've too added digital releases into the database, and only because it
> was allowed: I don't believe we should treat them as regular releases.
> Digital media is more like a new form of broadcasting than anything
> else. You do not own the music you "buy" on i-Tunes or Amazon. It's just
> another way to stream music as you would on Spotify or Deezer (On a
> related note, some bands make their music available for streaming ONLY,
> no CDs, no download. Streaming only), with the only difference being
> that you can do it off-line.

No, that isn't correct.  The music I purchased on iTunes, amazon, 
boomkat, bleep and bandcamp is a product I paid for.  And I have an 
implicit or explicit license to use these in the same way I can use a 
regular CD [1].

This is quite different from a streaming service such as spotify.  For 
example if I purchased a product first-sale doctrine / exhaustion still 
applies.  So I can move those files to a USB flash drive and lend it to 
my friends, or even sell these second-hand files.

Whereas if I download an .mp3 from an unauthorized source (I can legally 
do that in the Netherlands), then I have a private home copy, which I am 
not allowed to give to anyone.  If I move that file to a USB flash drive 
it is still my private home copy, and I am not allowed to sell it, I am 
not allowed to lend it to someone, etc...

-- kuno / warp.
[1] There has been a recent case (C-128/11 UsedSoft v Oracle) on this 
topic in Europe, whether digitally distributed products are considered 
products or services is perhaps different in other jurisdictions, or 
perhaps isn't clear yet in other jurisdictions -- but for Europeans, 
purchasing a digital download awards them the same rights as purchasing 
the same data on a physical medium.