Apple has filed a patent application for transferring "used" digital goods like MP3s, e-books and apps from one user to another, similar to a patent
for a "secondary market for digital objects" awarded to Amazon just
last month. The filing indicates that Apple may be thinking about
setting up its own marketplace or lending library for the transfer of
user-owned digital content — one that original content creators and
owners could get behind.
Both patents describe systems where a user could transfer a piece of
digital content (i.e., an e-book or film) to another user in exchange
for payment (or perhaps another item), not unlike Amazon's third-party
marketplace for used physical goods. There are two big differences
between Apple's and Amazon's systems. Apple proposes that an
(unspecified) portion of the proceeds from the sale of a piece of
digital content go to the original creator or publisher of the content,
ensuring that the original owner can still generate revenue beyond the
initial release period. Amazon suggests limiting the total number of
times an item can be transferred, or resold. In theory, that could
prevent the secondary market from becoming overrun with far cheaper
copies, thus devaluing the original.
That's one of the problems with Amazon's used books marketplace: With
so many books listed for a mere $0.01 (plus the cost of shipping),
shoppers have little incentive to pay $10 or $12 for the original thing.
With e-books, the price of used goods could come down even more
quickly: It's not difficult to imagine a scenario in which $0.01 used
copies of a bestselling e-book flooded the marketplace just a week after
it was published. And unlike a regular book, which may have some wear
and tear, a used e-book would be every bit as good as a new copy.
Here's the abstract of Amazon's patent, in full:
An electronic marketplace for used digital objects is disclosed. Digital objects including e-books, audio, video, computer applications, etc., purchased from an original vendor by a user are stored in a user's personalized data store. Content in a personalized data store may be accessible to the user via transfer such as moving, streaming, or download. When the user no longer desires to retain the right to access the now-used digital content, the user may move the used digital content to another user's personalized data store when permissible and the used digital content is deleted from the originating user's personalized data store. When a digital object exceeds a threshold number of moves or downloads, the ability to move may be deemed impermissible and suspended or terminated. Additionally or alternatively, a collection of objects may be assembled from individual digital objects stored in the personalized data stores of different users, and moved to a user's personalized data store.
And Apple's:
Techniques are provided for managing access to a digital content item (such as an ebook, music, movie, software application) to be transferred from one user to another. The transferor is prevented from accessing the digital content item after the transfer occurs. The entity that sold the digital content item to the transferor enforces the access rights to the digital content item by storing data that establishes which user currently has access to the digital content item. After the change in access rights, only the transferee is allowed access to the digital content item. As part of the change in access rights, the transferee may pay to obtain access to the digital content item. A portion of the proceeds of the "resale" may be paid to the creator or publisher of the digital content item and/or the entity that originally sold the digital content item to the original owner.
Content creators and publishers might not be a fan of either system
if it ends up cutting into full-price sales, but they may not have a
choice. In 1908, the "first-sale doctrine" was established after a
publisher attempted
to sue Macy's for selling a copy of a $1 novel for $0.89.The Supreme
Court ruled that a copyright owner could not control what happened to an
item (i.e., whether it was lent or resold) beyond the initial sale, a
ruling that has ensured the proliferation of used book stores and
lending libraries in the years since.
Whether that same protection applies to digital goods has yet to be
confirmed, but it could be soon. In New York, Capitol Records (EMI) is currently suing ReDigi,
a two-year-old marketplace that allows users to sell legally purchased
iTunes songs in exchange for credit to buy other iTunes songs. Capitol
claims ReDigi has infringed its rights by allowing unauthorized copying
of music files it owns. ReDigi says the files are being transferred, not
copied, and its actions are thus protected by the first-sale doctrine.
By filing the aforementioned patents, Apple and Amazon are hedging
their bets, laying the groundwork for marketplaces that would allow them
to profit from the resale and transfer of digital goods. That's great
for them, and it promises to be great for consumers, at least in the
short term. But unless these marketplaces allow original content
creators to benefit from the resale of their goods — as Apple indicates
it plans to do — reduced earnings prospects could "seriously reduce
creators’ incentive to create," Bill Rosenblatt, president of technology
consulting firm GiantSteps, observed to the New York Times. And that could be bad for everybody.
Image courtesy of Apple
