Re: Amazon.com "Limited License Grant"

the premise is the internet is the public domain. its the act of the author in placing his or her content on a internet enabled server that i believe places the content into the public domain.

Its like having a machine that dispenses candy bars.

   a provider comes along and says, I want everybody     to have some of my candy bars, so she programs the      machine to make her proprietory candy bars. 1000s of kids come alone an request a candy bar from the machine

    the machine makes and delivers them upon request after the kids eat the candy bars, the nice sweet cander bar maker serves the kids, their parents, grandparents, and ancestors in the grave for candy eating infringement?

come on now, when the content provider puts a file with her content on a internet-enabled-server-equipped computer which computer is attached to the public domain internet, she has not only given her consent to the user to download the file and its content and to consume it. Further, she has thereby made, at the time of placing the content containing file on to a web enabled and connected server a donation into the public domain, just the same as if she had programmed and loaded with the necessary materials into a candy machine her candy and announced to passerbyers, that the machine will deliver, for no cost, to any passerby, her delicious candy, please come and try it. She cannot then seek to sue the kid that ate the candy for infringement.

So the act of placing a content containing file onto an internet enabled computer configured with a file server and making the address of the machine avalable to the public DNS is the same as making a great big fat expensive gift or donation to the pulic domain. My opinion! Yumm yomm, that public domain candy is good.  

sterling

On Wed, 6 Aug 2003, Theodora Michaels wrote:

> My band sells our CD's through (among other places) the Amazon.com
> Advantage program. A bandmember just brought to my attention that
> they've recently changed their terms. Would anyone care to comment on
> their new "Limited License Grant," which is at
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/subst/partners/direct/limited-license.html/103-8831109-4147809
> ?
>
> Am I missing something, or is there nothing "limited" about this at
> all? It looks to me like they're claiming the right to use and
> sub-license everything we've previously uploaded (band trademark; cover
> art; text of bio, reviews, etc.) however they want, worldwide, forever,
> for free. Does anyone else think this is just a tad over-reaching?
>
> To the extent that this encompasses excerpts from record reviews that
> we've uploaded, I'm a bit confused as to how Amazon can even request
> such rights. I think everyone would agree that a band and its
> distributors have a right to use review excerpts _in promoting the
> product reviewed_, but I wouldn't assume that the band has the right to
> reprint the reviews in other contexts. So why is Amazon asking us to
> warrant that we have perpetual, worldwide, unlimited rights in the
> review excerpts we upload?
>
> I'm also very concerned about our cover art and package design. The
> photographers and artist gave us the right to use their work in
> packaging and for promotional purposes, but if we wanted to (for
> example) print our cover photo on T-shirts we would need a separate
> license from the photographer. Yet as I read the Amazon license, they
> would have the right to print our cover photo on T-shirts and sell them
> with no further remuneration to us or the photographer. Insofar as our
> cover photo was taken by legendary rock photographer Bob Gruen, who I
> assume ordinarily charges quite a bit for a "worldwide, perpetual,
> irrevocable" license, I find it astonishing that Amazon would think they
> can obtain such rights for free.
>
> Luckily we haven't yet uploaded any song samples.
>
> The trademark issues are a whole other can of worms, which of course
> should be discussed in a different forum.
>
> It would be a shame if we have to terminate our agreement with Amazon
> just because they're asking for more rights than we have or they need.
> But the way their license is written, it looks like we'll have no
> choice.
>
> Comments? Advice? Thanks.
>
> Theodora Michaels
> Bassist, Curse
> www.curseonline.com
>
Received on Mon Aug 18 2003 - 22:55:04 GMT