If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(TechSpot)   Apple patent would let you sell your iTunes to others. I myself prefer content to have that "new digital smell"   (techspot.com) divider line 73
    More: Interesting, iTunes, digital recording, icloud, patent applications  
•       •       •

1128 clicks; posted to Geek » on 08 Mar 2013 at 2:11 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



73 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-08 11:09:08 AM
Are there pricing controls? Can this be used as a payment system for drugs? For sex?
 
2013-03-08 02:17:42 PM
Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.
 
2013-03-08 02:18:45 PM
mmm... sloppy mp3 seconds....
 
2013-03-08 02:20:16 PM
Great, now iTunes will be all laggy due to dupers.

But seriously - haven't a number of computer games had similar mechanisms for selling digital content in ways that the original owner can no longer access the content they sold for some time now.

How is this different from RMAH or various other digital-cash exchange methods?
 
2013-03-08 02:20:42 PM

HeartBurnKid: Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.


So you would prefer that people would not be able to sell their music at all? Or the Amazon model where you have to do it through them (maybe even Amazon taking a cut)?
 
2013-03-08 02:21:24 PM

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Great, now iTunes will be all laggy due to dupers.

But seriously - haven't a number of computer games had similar mechanisms for selling digital content in ways that the original owner can no longer access the content they sold for some time now.

How is this different from RMAH or various other digital-cash exchange methods?


I think it's online isn't it? You could read it.
 
2013-03-08 02:24:13 PM
370 GOTO 310
 
2013-03-08 02:28:04 PM
It's cool that Apple is looking at allowing this but do we really need a patent for this?
 
2013-03-08 02:30:08 PM

Corvus:  

I think it's online isn't it? You could read it.


IANAL - to me it looks a lot like the steps outlined say that the method verified you own the item, then verifies conditions of sale have been met and then transfers the ownership of the item to the buyer while removing your access to it. It sounds a lot like the same process used for trading in games, which has included real money trading for a while.

I'm open to being corrected/informed by someone with better understanding of patent law.
 
2013-03-08 02:30:50 PM
People still buy music?  How quaint.
 
2013-03-08 02:42:39 PM

Corvus: HeartBurnKid: Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.

So you would prefer that people would not be able to sell their music at all? Or the Amazon model where you have to do it through them (maybe even Amazon taking a cut)?


No,  Apple should be free to do this,  but claiming ownership of the idea of allowing secondary sales is absurd.  This does not need a patent for apple to be able to do it, they just want to stop other competitors from doing the same thing.
 
2013-03-08 02:43:37 PM

Warlordtrooper: Corvus: HeartBurnKid: Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.

So you would prefer that people would not be able to sell their music at all? Or the Amazon model where you have to do it through them (maybe even Amazon taking a cut)?

No,  Apple should be free to do this,  but claiming ownership of the idea of allowing secondary sales is absurd.  This does not need a patent for apple to be able to do it, they just want to stop other competitors from doing the same thing.


This just in.  Apple to sue the Earth for having rounded corners
 
2013-03-08 02:46:24 PM
i291.photobucket.com
Good luck with that, Apple.
 
2013-03-08 02:47:03 PM
This is goddamned stupid.  Enough with patenting every freaking idea.

I think we either need a Justice Department lawsuit against Apple for Patent Trolling, or a directive to the Patent Office to stop issuing these kinds of patents.

Or BOTH.
 
2013-03-08 03:03:12 PM

HeartBurnKid: Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.


and let's be clear, under this "patent" you only get to sell something YOU PAID FOR, if and only if Apple gets a cut of the sale.

Fark them with a rusty urn filled with Steve Job's ashes
 
2013-03-08 03:09:09 PM
How nice of them to "let" us resell something we own.
 
2013-03-08 03:35:06 PM
Well Apple wants a cut of the secondary sells.Because the first cut wasn't the deepest.
 
2013-03-08 03:40:55 PM

Corvus: HeartBurnKid: Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.

So you would prefer that people would not be able to sell their music at all? Or the Amazon model where you have to do it through them (maybe even Amazon taking a cut)?


It's European Law that secondary sales must be possible. Apple is effectively patenting compliance to European Law...
 
2013-03-08 03:59:35 PM

Warlordtrooper: Corvus: HeartBurnKid: Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.

So you would prefer that people would not be able to sell their music at all? Or the Amazon model where you have to do it through them (maybe even Amazon taking a cut)?

No,  Apple should be free to do this,  but claiming ownership of the idea of allowing secondary sales is absurd.


Contrary to what HeartBurnKid said, they're not.
 
2013-03-08 04:00:30 PM
You're all doing it wrong. The fact that Apple has a patent on a way to transfer the license is a good thing--- I should be able to transfer all of my unwanted crap to someone who does want it and there should be no more farking with it.  yeah so let's tell apple how they are doing it wrong when the other assholes out there are trying to take away being able to use second-hand PHYSICAL media.
 
2013-03-08 04:02:05 PM

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Great, now iTunes will be all laggy due to dupers.

But seriously - haven't a number of computer games had similar mechanisms for selling digital content in ways that the original owner can no longer access the content they sold for some time now.

How is this different from RMAH or various other digital-cash exchange methods?


The RMAH doesn't track how much you've used up or could have used up the item.

Not saying the application is valid - at least under current law, they've got a huge problem in the first claim - but they're not simply trying to patent the concept of selling used items.
 
2013-03-08 04:10:03 PM

HeartBurnKid: Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.


RIAA and MPAA won't let them do this anyway...
 
2013-03-08 04:42:33 PM

Corvus: HeartBurnKid: Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.

So you would prefer that people would not be able to sell their music at all? Or the Amazon model where you have to do it through them (maybe even Amazon taking a cut)?


So you would prefer to have that right only for iTunes content? You want Google, MS, Amazon, Valve, etc. to be legally barred from doing anything that even vaguely looks like allowing you to resell content?
 
2013-03-08 04:43:54 PM
When the Playstation and XBOX go to the all digital model I expect there to be a way to transfer "digital rights" of a game from one gamer to another when all the GameStops go out of business.
 
2013-03-08 04:45:04 PM

HeartBurnKid: Corvus: HeartBurnKid: Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.

So you would prefer that people would not be able to sell their music at all? Or the Amazon model where you have to do it through them (maybe even Amazon taking a cut)?

So you would prefer to have that right only for iTunes content? You want Google, MS, Amazon, Valve, etc. to be legally barred from doing anything that even vaguely looks like allowing you to resell content?


According to the article Amazon already has a similar patent so breathe deeply and relax.
 
2013-03-08 04:47:10 PM
Theaetetus:

The RMAH doesn't track how much you've used up or could have used up the item.

Not saying the application is valid - at least under current law, they've got a huge problem in the first claim - but they're not simply trying to patent the concept of selling used items.


Hmm... D3 doesn't have non-repairable non-rechargeable items, but if they opened it a RMAH D2 then it certainly would. And while Blizzard hasn't run authorized buying of items for D2 there has been a market going for some time. I don't know if that would be enough to invalidate that claim by apple but there are markets for digital goods that do track how much a person has used a digital item.

Again - don't even have an online GED in law, just very surprised that there isn't a metric ton of prior art in the gaming industry that addresses most or all of the steps in some manner.
 
2013-03-08 04:51:38 PM
I'd love it if I could sell one or two of my Steam games to someone else.
 
2013-03-08 04:59:49 PM

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Theaetetus:

The RMAH doesn't track how much you've used up or could have used up the item.

Not saying the application is valid - at least under current law, they've got a huge problem in the first claim - but they're not simply trying to patent the concept of selling used items.

Hmm... D3 doesn't have non-repairable non-rechargeable items, but if they opened it a RMAH D2 then it certainly would. And while Blizzard hasn't run authorized buying of items for D2 there has been a market going for some time. I don't know if that would be enough to invalidate that claim by apple but there are markets for digital goods that do track how much a person has used a digital item.

Again - don't even have an online GED in law, just very surprised that there isn't a metric ton of prior art in the gaming industry that addresses most or all of the steps in some manner.


Well, bear in mind that this application hasn't even been examined yet, just published, so there may well be. Also, the claims are initially written broadly so that they can be narrowed to cover just the new inventive concept.

That said, there seems to be a distinction here from even a non-repairable non-rechargeable item D2 auction house - the claims discuss determining whether the seller will be paid based on those charges. Almost like you get a prorated amount of money based on usage, which is an interesting idea, particularly for something like a movie or song that doesn't actually wear out.
 
2013-03-08 06:22:40 PM
I think that Apple wants to cut off secondary sales..  This is just a little patent protection to go after anyone who offers it.
 
2013-03-08 06:28:01 PM
... wait...

People are still buying music?
You know there are websites that can turn youtubes into mp3's so you dont even have to mess around with torrents or p2p programs...

\I do buy music -- but not online. Or from HMV. Not because im hipster but because im a cheap cynical crank.
 
2013-03-08 06:36:28 PM

HeartBurnKid: Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.


Unwad your panties there.  It's a patent on the method for delivering secondary sales.
 
2013-03-08 06:57:40 PM

dognose4: I think that Apple wants to cut off secondary sales..  This is just a little patent protection to go after anyone who offers it.




They don't want to cut off secondary sales, they want a peice of the action for every secondary sale possible.
 
2013-03-08 07:44:05 PM

DenisVengeance: It's a patent on the method for delivering secondary sales.


'UPDATE item_sales SET owner_id = $newOwner WHERE item_id = $item AND owner_id = $oldOwner' shouldn't be a patentable invention, either.
 
2013-03-08 07:48:44 PM

Smeggy Smurf: People still buy music?  How quaint.


People believe they are entitled to the creative work of others for free? How asinine.
 
2013-03-08 07:58:02 PM

Leishu: People believe they are entitled to the creative work of others for free? How asinine.


But i am. Recording music isn't anything new. VCR's and tapes were subjected to the same arguments when they came out and the consensus seemed to be that as long as you weren't selling copies and it was for personal use it was legal and fine.

How is downloading a song from youtube different from taping a song off the radio? How is it different from recording my favorite Simpsons episodes on a tape or disk?

What makes downloading music different from using a DVR?
 
2013-03-08 08:14:43 PM

mikefinch: Leishu: People believe they are entitled to the creative work of others for free? How asinine.

But i am. Recording music isn't anything new. VCR's and tapes were subjected to the same arguments when they came out and the consensus seemed to be that as long as you weren't selling copies and it was for personal use it was legal and fine.

How is downloading a song from youtube different from taping a song off the radio? How is it different from recording my favorite Simpsons episodes on a tape or disk?

What makes downloading music different from using a DVR?


You're acting as if any of that makes you entitled to the creative work of others for free. It makes you able to get it. That does not mean it is ethical, and that does not mean that you are entitled to it any more than you are entitled so someone's wallet just because you a baseball bat with which you can beat them into submission to get it. It is also very different from recording from the radio or TV in major ways, but I don't expect you to realize why, as you have just demonstrated that you don't, and have no inclination to. Do it if you will, but do not pretend it is a case of anything other than wanting to have the work of others for free, and, in many cases, is anything less than taking money directly out of the pockets of musicians.
 
2013-03-08 08:16:58 PM
Skipped a few words there, but I think my point came through just fine. I'll await three more strawmen, because those who steal the work of others will go to great lengths to make it seem as if it is anything less than theft.
 
2013-03-08 08:20:17 PM

Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: This is goddamned stupid.  Enough with patenting every freaking idea.

I think we either need a Justice Department lawsuit against Apple for Patent Trolling, or a directive to the Patent Office to stop issuing these kinds of patents.

Or BOTH.


You should look up the definition of "patent troll". Sure, Apple agressivly defends its patents and I'm not saying I agree with everything they do, but under no definition of the term that I'm aware of are they "patent trolls".
 
2013-03-08 08:29:36 PM

OriginalGamer: You should look up the definition of "patent troll". Sure, Apple agressivly defends its patents and I'm not saying I agree with everything they do, but under no definition of the term that I'm aware of are they "patent trolls".


I believe he's using the Slashdot definition, wherein any IP-related legal action that he doesn't like qualifies as "patent trolling".
 
2013-03-08 08:30:45 PM

Warlordtrooper: Corvus: HeartBurnKid: Apple is seriously trying to patent secondary sales.

This is ludicrous.

So you would prefer that people would not be able to sell their music at all? Or the Amazon model where you have to do it through them (maybe even Amazon taking a cut)?

No,  Apple should be free to do this,  but claiming ownership of the idea of allowing secondary sales is absurd.  This does not need a patent for apple to be able to do it, they just want to stop charge other competitors  from for doing the same thing.

 
2013-03-08 08:39:32 PM

psy5ive: You're all doing it wrong. The fact that Apple has a patent on a way to transfer the license is a good thing--- I should be able to transfer all of my unwanted crap to someone who does want it and there should be no more farking with it.  yeah so let's tell apple how they are doing it wrong when the other assholes out there are trying to take away being able to use second-hand PHYSICAL media.


except that anyone should be able to allow these second hand sales. It shouldn't be restricted to just apples services
 
2013-03-08 09:34:19 PM

mikefinch: ... wait...

People are still buying music?
You know there are websites that can turn youtubes into mp3's so you dont even have to mess around with torrents or p2p programs...

\I do buy music -- but not online. Or from HMV. Not because im hipster but because im a cheap cynical crank.


If you're going to pirate, don't be a farktard, skip the youtube bullshiat and just pirate it like a real boy.

No one on fark is sitting in their basement going 'OH MY farkING GOD I CAN GET FREE MUSIC MIKEFINCH IS A GOD FOR OPENING MY EYES!!'

We're all well aware of this. We're not clinically retarded or 4.  Some of us simply prefer, for ethical reasons (hey, do you know what those are?) to purchase things legally.  And if we can't justify it, we, and this apparently would be a massive shock, so sit down, don't buy it.

Yes, I could steal/pirate things. Easily. I'm on what is effectively a hotel wifi setup which acts as a wonderful confound between myself and 30+ people, as to who downloaded what. Fast big pipes too.  But I choose not to. Because either something is worth buying, or it's not. And just because I can get something for nothing doesn't mean I should. And doesn't mean I'm entitled to everything for free because.
 
2013-03-08 09:43:57 PM
If only there was a device that could broadcast the music I like in AM or FM 24/7 in most cities and towns.
 
2013-03-08 10:19:36 PM

kroonermanblack: No one on fark is sitting in their basement going 'OH MY farkING GOD I CAN GET FREE MUSIC MIKEFINCH IS A GOD FOR OPENING MY EYES!!'


I was being facetious...

I agree you should pay for stuff you like. But i also think i should be able to tape stuff and watch and listen to it later. Or over. As many times as you want.
 
2013-03-08 10:29:02 PM

mikefinch: kroonermanblack: No one on fark is sitting in their basement going 'OH MY farkING GOD I CAN GET FREE MUSIC MIKEFINCH IS A GOD FOR OPENING MY EYES!!'

I was being facetious...

I agree you should pay for stuff you like. But i also think i should be able to tape stuff and watch and listen to it later. Or over. As many times as you want.


I very very very much agree. I just don't like the entitlement line and I especially don't like the idiots who ask as if those of us who pay for what we listen to are somehow luddites, as opposed to people who support the artists that we appreciate.
 
2013-03-08 10:30:09 PM
Let me mention that my work requires me to live in the woods without tv or am/fm all summer and my only source of entertainment is what i bring in. My only power is a propane generator and fuel has to be choppered in. Its remote is what im saying... So i download shows that play all winter and i dont watch them. Stuff like breaking bad, or Game of Thrones, and i watch them over the summer when all i have is a UHF radio... Im not made of money and 99% of the songs i download get played on the radio with fair frequency or my wife or i or our siblings owned the CD or tape back in the day. I record stuff because its a cheap legal option and no i really dont feel like im taking money out of anyones pocket by doing it.

Consumer technology made recording cheap and easy and i dont think paying 60 bucks of a season of some show i might watch once or twice on DVD is really supporting the people who made it. Maybe the company around them but hardly them. Buy the stuff you really appreciate, but you could break a middle class income buying enough music on itunes to fill an ipad.
 
2013-03-08 10:55:29 PM

mikefinch: Let me mention that my work requires me to live in the woods without tv or am/fm all summer and my only source of entertainment is what i bring in. My only power is a propane generator and fuel has to be choppered in. Its remote is what im saying... So i download shows that play all winter and i dont watch them. Stuff like breaking bad, or Game of Thrones, and i watch them over the summer when all i have is a UHF radio... Im not made of money and 99% of the songs i download get played on the radio with fair frequency or my wife or i or our siblings owned the CD or tape back in the day. I record stuff because its a cheap legal option and no i really dont feel like im taking money out of anyones pocket by doing it.

Consumer technology made recording cheap and easy and i dont think paying 60 bucks of a season of some show i might watch once or twice on DVD is really supporting the people who made it. Maybe the company around them but hardly them. Buy the stuff you really appreciate, but you could break a middle class income buying enough music on itunes to fill an ipad.


Dude, you don't have to justify yourself. I don't really care. I've spent a lot of time downloading stuff.  I just eventually stopped caring much for 90% of the stuff I downloaded, and cut out most of my consumption so that I just buy the few albums I like. I'm one of 'those' people who don't watch a ton of TV (what I do watch is Netflix on PC anyway, my TV stays off except console time).

I don't really care what you do. Pirate, don't, whatever.  But it's the people who think they're being somehow hilarious coming in to threads and going 'aherpaderpa you can get music free!' who are obnoxious.

And seriously, drop the youtube crap, and just learn to actually pirate albums. It's faster, easier, and has the same end-goal man. Youtube strippers aren't some magical fair use loophole that pirating falls into, it's the same. It doesn't really matter if it's played on the air, or not, unless you're sitting there with a physical recording device, and even THAT is stupid. Just pirate it, stop with the bullshiat confounds.

Also, please tell me you have the brains to take a solar panel or 20 with you to this super-remote work location? You can use it to charge some deep-cell batteries and cut down on your fuel consumption by an insane amount.

And/or you could take an e-ink reader, and have stuff to do with low-no power consumption if you like reading.
 
2013-03-08 11:11:52 PM
I just use these to cut strips from my SD cards for my garage sales.

images.bidorbuy.co.za
 
2013-03-08 11:18:05 PM

Leishu: Smeggy Smurf: People still buy music?  How quaint.

People believe they are entitled to the creative work of others for free? How asinine.


The radio is stealing?
Pandora.com is stealing?
Spotify is stealing?

Oh wait, you're just being a willful idiot.  Carry on.
 
2013-03-09 12:04:43 AM

Smeggy Smurf: Leishu: Smeggy Smurf: People still buy music?  How quaint.

People believe they are entitled to the creative work of others for free? How asinine.

The radio is stealing?
Pandora.com is stealing?
Spotify is stealing?

Oh wait, you're just being a willful idiot.  Carry on.


You know. Because copyright infringement is stealing. And murder is rape. And Jay walking is embezzlement. And hacking is domestic abuse.

We have words for a reason. Appeals to emotion through loaded words like theft is disingenuous.
 
Displayed 50 of 73 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report