Posted Aug 15, 2008 15:18 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata
In reply to: What's in a name
Parent article: GeekPAC to fight for information rights
Because of the
EULA's attached to consumable media, we don't actually own the content and thus have no rights
to it, even though we paid for it.
This is self-contradictory. According to the beginning of the sentence, we didn't pay for the content; the end says we did. The statement makes it sound like we're getting less than we paid for, but doesn't provide any support for that.
The confused wording obscures the point. Is the point that people shouldn't have the right to "rent" the content (because it creates unwanted competition for other consumers) or that consumers are being misled and paying more/getting less than they intend?
to post comments)