Comments on: Change cuts both ways

By: Alfonso

Alfonso — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 01:58:48 +0000

Maybe I wasn’t clear, but I was trying to convey exactly what you explained, David. That the medium is yours to lend, swap, trade, sell and burn, but that the content (the intellectual property it presents) remains the property of the author/distributor/producer/whatever. Perhaps it was the content part that wasn’t clear.

Thanks for the heads up and the useful links!

By: David Rodríguez

David Rodríguez — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 23:54:40 +0000

“In both cases, you paid for a medium X as a vehicle through which you gain access to content Y without ever really owning said content. ”

Technically speaking that’s a false argument. The first-sale doctrine does grant you ownership of a physical book (or cd, dvd etc). It’s the reason why you can lend it, sell it or rip it into pieces and create a collage of the pages to decorate your wall. You can’t legally sell something which you don’t own. Even if you were referring to the medium itself, by distinguishing between the physical aspects of a book vis a vis the literally work, remember that there is also copyrighted content in the medium (i.e. graphic design, art).

I agree with the general message you are trying to convey and just wanted to point out the error in that sentence. Here’s some further reading about the first-sale doctrine for those who are interested:

http://www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/CopyrightLaw/FirstSaleDoctrine/FirstSale.shtml

http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/meta-elements/journals/bclawr/44_2/09_TXT.htm
http://www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/CopyrightLaw/FirstSaleDoctrine/FirstSale.shtml

By: Alfonso

Alfonso — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 13:52:18 +0000

That too is a very good point, redod. And that’s what I mean by the medium offering certain advantages: it still promotes connection and interaction with other fans of the content you consume, but in a different (and, admittedly, more profitable) way.

And I don’t think DRM is necessarily the way to go in the long term. Making digital media behave like analog media is about as unimaginative a solution as humanly possible. Perhaps we arrive at a place in the near future where content becomes universally free, and the brand that surrounds it becomes the commercial vehicle to make it all worthwhile from a business perspective. I’ll soon write a short post on that idea as well.

Thanks for commenting!

By: Tweets that mention Change cuts both ways — SUb -- Topsy.com

Tweets that mention Change cuts both ways — SUb -- Topsy.com — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 11:53:01 +0000

[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Alfonso Gómez-Arzola, alphamanuel. alphamanuel said: RT @agarzola: “Go out, buy comics and swap the shit out of them.” Change cuts both ways: http://bit.ly/c5qvRk […]

By: redod

redod — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 06:24:06 +0000

Awesome post. I’d like to add that even as technology - say the iPad - takes away SOME of the comic book ‘swapping’ ability of our youth, it enables us to connect to many more comic fans and swap our opinions, news, and other comic-book related (or not) experiences instead.

So maybe I do miss sharing comics with brothers and classmates - its not the only thing I miss about those days - but I now trade recommendations and share my thoughts on stuff I’ve read with people from all around the world. I couldn’t possibly imagine doing that way back when.

Perhaps the issue is about economics… although the $1.99 being charged per issue is, if I recall correctly, cheaper than your average book these days. I sure would like to be able to purchase collections or story arcs at a discounted price… but if someone plunked down the $500+ for a ‘third device’ that is - for now - considered a luxury rather than a necessity, then perhaps that person is just looking to get more books for free than the number included in the Marvel App (which I am sure there are ways to do).

There’s also nothing stopping me from lending my iPad to a friend so he can read the latest Spiderman book.