{"id":584,"date":"2013-09-18T21:05:00","date_gmt":"2013-09-18T21:05:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/?p=584"},"modified":"2023-12-21T17:16:53","modified_gmt":"2023-12-21T17:16:53","slug":"court-shuts-down-resale-of-digital-music-files","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/2013\/09\/18\/court-shuts-down-resale-of-digital-music-files\/","title":{"rendered":"Court shuts down resale of digital music files"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Judge Richard J. Sullivan of the Southern District of New York held that owners of digital music have no right to sell that music to others.&nbsp;<a href=\"http:\/\/digitalcommons.law.scu.edu\/cgi\/viewcontent.cgi?article=1334&amp;context=historical\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc.,<\/a>&nbsp;2013 WL 1286134 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). The case involved a company named ReDigi that created a software program that allowed legally-owned digital music files to be transferred by sale from one owner to a buyer in a manner that insured that the file was not retained on the original computer. The service also only allowed this to happen one file or album at a time so that it would not become a general means of selling the same song to multiple buyers. The service was limited to files purchased on iTunes or from another ReDigi user.&nbsp;The goal was to create a market for used digital music files.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The court found that the service resulted in a reproduction of the original file and that this was an unlawful copy within the meaning of the copyright act, as well as a violation of the copyright owners distribution rights and that the use was not a &#8220;fair use.&#8221; ReDigi had claimed that it was taking advantage of the &#8220;first sale&#8221; doctrine that allows those who buy a book or CD or DVD to resell it on the secondary market. The court disagreed because the sale of a CD does not involve a copy or a reproduction as is the case with digital files. Whether or not it would be a good idea to allow a secondary market in digital files, the court said, was an issue for Congress that might warrant amendment or modernization of the Copyright Act.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"taxonomy-category wp-block-post-terms\"><a href=\"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/category\/intellectual-property\/\" rel=\"tag\">Intellectual Property<\/a><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Judge Richard J. Sullivan of the Southern District of New York held that owners of digital music have no right to sell that music to others.&nbsp;Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc.,&nbsp;2013 WL 1286134 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). The case involved a company named ReDigi that created a software program that allowed legally-owned digital music files to be transferred by sale from one owner to a buyer in a manner that insured that the file was not retained on the original computer. The service also only allowed this to happen one file or album at a time so that it would not become a general means of selling the same song to multiple buyers. The service was limited to files purchased on iTunes or from another ReDigi user.&nbsp;The goal was to create a market for used digital music files. The court found that the service resulted in a reproduction of the original file &hellip;<\/p>\n<p class=\"read-more\"> <a class=\"\" href=\"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/2013\/09\/18\/court-shuts-down-resale-of-digital-music-files\/\"> <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Court shuts down resale of digital music files<\/span> Read More &raquo;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":17,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[61],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-584","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-intellectual-property"],"featured_image_src":null,"featured_image_src_square":null,"author_info":{"display_name":"jsinger","author_link":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/author\/jsinger\/"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/584","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/17"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=584"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/584\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=584"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=584"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/faculty.law.harvard.edu\/joseph-singer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=584"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}