[Avodah] sold or leased?

[Moshe Yehuda Gluck]

I would assume that it's not legally binding, otherwise the RIAA would have
done it long ago. In addition, halachically, there isn't any shtar, any
kinyan or any t'nai. Doesn't seem to be binding at all. Also, according to
what they write, it would be l'chatchilah assur to damage or to discard
their CDs  - the absolution is only for after the fact. As far as copying is
concerned, fair-use permits it (whatever fair-use is), so how can they say
that it's bona fide theft according to civil law? Also, unless it's in the
package insert, they never disclosed the terms of the lease. Also, where is
the kinyan taking place? The retailer pays Aderet, and the customer pays the
retailer. Yet, Aderet is trying to enter into a contractual relationship
directly with the customer. To sum up, I think that this is just a PR
effort, not worth the paper it's printed on.

 

KT,

MYG 

 

  _____  

From: avodah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org
[mailto:avodah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org] On Behalf Of Newman,Saul Z
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 11:41 AM
To: 'Avodah'
Subject: [Avodah] sold or leased?

 

http://bp1.blogger.com/_cktCgO7QYZg/Rdzia08k-bI/AAAAAAAAADk/aCWhHSr1FJw/s160
0-h/aderetLease.jpg  a frum record company's non-sale of its records. an
amalgam of halachic /civil law issues?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070223/0eb73cf8/attachment-0002.htm>