Senator Wyden Thinks Consumers Buying Digital Media Should Know What They’re Getting

Senator Ron Wyden wants the government to force companies to make it clear to buyers what they are getting when they buy digital media online.

Wyden in a letter to the FTC is seeking guidance to “ensure that consumers who purchase or license digital goods can make informed decisions and understand what ownership rights they are obtaining.” Consumers should know how long the license lasts, and whether they can transfer or resell the license (typically not). The Verge earlier reported on the letter.

Because of the pesky issue of DRM copyright technology, consumers buying content online—like movies and TV shows—often do not own it in the traditional sense. A digital purchase of a movie from Amazon or a game from Microsoft is tied to an online account, and buyers generally obtain a “license” to access it. There are also often restrictions, too. Amazon generally makes it impossible to download e-books purchased from its store and use them on other types of non-Kindle devices, or sell them.

There already exists fine print in most e-commerce platforms outlining consumer rights, but Wyden seems to be asking that these details be outlined more clearly before and after purchase.

The old adage “You will own nothing, and you will like it” applies here. For the most part, consumers do not “own” anything digital so long as companies place restrictions on how they are used after purchase. The software is the problem: You may own an Xbox or a Google Nest camera, but a simple update or discontinuation of support can render them useless, and there is not much consumers can do.

Particularly when it comes to media, a lot of these restrictions have been put in place to combat piracy, but it makes for a worse consumer experience and benefits large tech companies. When consumers buy an e-book from Amazon, they often intuitively expect that the book belongs to them, and yet they cannot do simple things like download the file and use it on a non-Kindle device or sell the book to someone else. While these policies are put in place under the guise of preventing theft, they also benefit the likes of Amazon by keeping people locked in their ecosystem and limiting any secondary market.

Media companies do not even really want consumers buying their content at all. Streaming has become the preferred business model as it creates a recurring stream of revenue, and can expand the overall market—more consumers may become Xbox gamers if they can pay a low monthly fee for access rather than having to buy each game outright.

The issue of digital ownership rights may seem like a niche concern, and consumers satisfied by streaming may not care. But other grassroots movements like right-to-repair have seen success in giving consumers more control over the products they purchase. That is ultimately a good thing, even if only a small percentage of the public takes advantage. Companies act in their own interests, and it is the role of the government to step in when necessary. Most people will not bother trying to fix their own iPhone, but it is hard to argue they should be prevented from doing so.

What the U.S. likely needs, critics say, is a first-sale doctrine for digital products. The doctrine is a legal concept codified in copyright law that gives buyers the right to sell purchased media without the copyright owner’s permission. It has never applied to digital goods because downloading digital media is considered a reproduction.