One of the other threads started discussing how libraries are typically non-transferrable. This is one of my pet peeves, so I thought I'd start a thread and maybe some of you folks on this forum who sell lib's for a living can help me understand this:
What's the rationale for making a product 'Non-Transferable'? I mean, I know you're legally able to do this, and if a consumer agrees to it then he's bound by it. And if you can get it, hey, this is capitalism, good for you. But my question is more of an ethical one, I guess. What is it about a sound library that makes it non-transferrable? I don't understand, where does that idea come from? Now, some people think that because they can copy software, that they're entitled to that software (e.g. illegal file-swapping). I disagree with this completely, and I think the analogy to physical goods that you hear sometimes is a good one. If I buy a sewing machine or toaster, I shouldn't be able to duplicate it, even if someone invents a 'matter duplicator' gun that makes it possible. I'm paying for the design and r&d of that product and I've no right to duplicate it without paying for another one. Same for software. That's why much time and effort is spent on dongles and such, to make it more like a physical product, where you don't have control over copies. I agree with all of this (although noone likes having to deal with dongles). But now the software manufacturers take it one step further, they say "and you can't sell it to anyone else". This is where you lose me. What makes a sound library so special? How would it go if a TV manufacturer said "nope, you can't sell that on eBay, sorry, it's a non-transferrable TV". How is this different? You want equal footing with any other physical product, where to have 2 of 'em you pay for 2 of 'em, but you want more - you want to keep me from selling it to someone else. Right? What gives a software company the right to say that (ethically, not legally, which I'm not questioning)?
I'd be interested in anyone's thoughts on the matter. Maybe I'm just missing something. Again, I understand there's nothing illegal about it, and if you can get it, get it, but how is it justified, from an ethical/common sense standpoint?