You Do It Because You CAN (9/9/03)
SceneLink
 

You thought they'd ignore it, didn'tcha? You figured that Apple would just pretend that last week's eBay auction of a song purchased from the iTunes Music Store never happened. (That's certainly what eBay's doing, at any rate.) Well, frankly, so do we; Apple usually doesn't address goofiness like that directly, and we're more than used to seeing the phrase "Apple was unavailable for comment" at the end of articles about such shenanigans. And yet this time, the company had an official take on the whole issue of "First Sale" as it pertains to all those ABBA songs you've been hoarding: according to CNET, as far as Apple's concerned, you do, indeed, "perhaps" have the right to resell the music you've purchased.

That's more significant than it may first sound, because what Apple's Peter Lowe is saying is that, yes, when you buy music from the iTMS, you're buying music from the iTMS. ("Perhaps," sure, but we'll take it.) You're not just paying for a license to listen to the downloaded data. As an area, it's all sort of grey and fuzzy and it's got little fiddly bits hanging off it at weird angles, but from Apple's perspective, you do in fact own that particular recording of that song, so according to the doctrine of "First Sale" (which is what allows you to sell a book or CD that you bought without having to get an okay from the copyright holder first), you're perfectly free to try to resell it if you like. The only thing is, you probably won't like.

What Pete "director of marketing for applications and services and boy this is a really long nickname oh wait it's actually my job title so never mind" Lowe actually told CNET was that "Apple's position is that it is impractical, though perhaps within someone's rights, to sell music purchased online." The thorny bit, of course, is the FreePlay digital rights management embedded into iTMS songs, which ties the purchaser to the downloaded tune so that it can't just be copied willy-nilly all over the planet. Since your purchased songs are linked to your Apple ID, in order to resell a song that the buyer could actually play, you'd also have to sell your account. And the problem with that is, of course, if you bought 100 songs and sell just one, if your Apple ID gets sold with that one, suddenly you've got no way to play the other 99. D'oh!

On top of that, since there are technical hurdles to jump on both the buying and selling ends of the transaction and the song is available hassle-free for 99 cents directly from the iTMS in the first place, the market for resold iTMS music should be next to nonexistent. So basically, what Apple is saying is that reselling your iTMS songs is kinda like being a flabby and unattractive man who rides a unicycle through areas of heavy pedestrian traffic while singing campfire songs topless: you can do it and it seems to be legal, but no one actually wants you to do it, so why go through the hassle? (No offense to the flabby, unattractive, unicycle-riding, Kumbaya-singing, topless-going contingent of our viewing audience, of course.)

That said, Apple is clearly misjudging the demand for used iTMS songs, since the one auctioned on eBay had risen to over $100,000 before eBay pulled the plug. We would gladly part with our Apple IDs for that kind of cash. Heck, at this point we'll sell 'em for eighty bucks and a bag of Baked Lays. Any takers?

 
SceneLink (4194)
And Now For A Word From Our Sponsors
 

From the writer/creator of AtAT, a Pandemic Dad Joke taken WAYYYYYY too far

 

The above scene was taken from the 9/9/03 episode:

September 9, 2003: The G4 in the iMac you buy next year might actually be a G3-- but don't worry, it's cool. Meanwhile, Apple bails on Seybold for-- no kidding, here-- OracleWorld, and also clarifies its position on reselling iTunes Music Store songs: you can, but why on earth would you want to?...

Other scenes from that episode:

  • 4192: Hijinks of G-Nomenclature (9/9/03)   You know, Apple really flooded us with plot twists in the form of eleventy-seventy press releases yesterday, so we didn't get to tackle some of the quieter things poking around in the dark corners of the Mac universe...

  • 4193: Questionable Show Choices (9/9/03)   Say, is it just us, or are Apple's rejiggered priorities wreaking serious havoc with the established order of things in the Mac-centric trade show business? Of course you know all about the company's steadfast refusal to participate in next summer's Macworld Expo (ostensibly because Boston is just too much of a hole to visit, but don't forget that Apple considered pulling out of this year's summer Expo in New York as well)...

Or view the entire episode as originally broadcast...

Vote Early, Vote Often!
Why did you tune in to this '90s relic of a soap opera?
Nostalgia is the next best thing to feeling alive
My name is Rip Van Winkle and I just woke up; what did I miss?
I'm trying to pretend the last 20 years never happened
I mean, if it worked for Friends, why not?
I came here looking for a receptacle in which to place the cremated remains of my deceased Java applets (think about it)

(1245 votes)

As an Amazon Associate, AtAT earns from qualifying purchases

DISCLAIMER: AtAT was not a news site any more than Inside Edition was a "real" news show. We made Dawson's Creek look like 60 Minutes. We engaged in rampant guesswork, wild speculation, and pure fabrication for the entertainment of our viewers. Sure, everything here was "inspired by actual events," but so was Amityville II: The Possession. So lighten up.

Site best viewed with a sense of humor. AtAT is not responsible for lost or stolen articles. Keep hands inside car at all times. The drinking of beverages while watching AtAT is strongly discouraged; AtAT is not responsible for damage, discomfort, or staining caused by spit-takes or "nosers."

Everything you see here that isn't attributed to other parties is copyright ©,1997-2024 J. Miller and may not be reproduced or rebroadcast without his explicit consent (or possibly the express written consent of Major League Baseball, but we doubt it).