Although this topic might
appear slightly gloomy (especially on a Friday afternoon), it
is something which has been attracting a good deal of attention (including controversy) lately.
With a post published
yesterday on its Public
Policy Blog, Google announced the launch of "a new feature that
makes it easy to tell Google what you want done with your digital assets [eg, photos, emails, documents] when you die or can no
longer use your account."
By using this feature, you can in fact decide if and when your account is
treated as inactive, what happens with your data and who is notified. You
can set a timeout period of 3-6-9-12 months, after which you account can
be classed as inactive. Following a 1-month warning, your data will be shared
with a friend or family member designated when you enabled your Inactive
Account Manager, or your account will be deleted entirely.
As reported by The
Independent, Facebook already has a
function that allows friends and family to "memorialise" an account
once its owner has died. It is worth adding that also legislative initiatives have been recently undertaken in this respect, as is explained by Forbes.
The introduction of Google Inactive
Account Manager looks particularly interesting in the context of the broader and fascinating
debate on ownership of immaterial goods (including emails),
applicability of EU
exhaustion / US first sale doctrine and
what is going to happen to digital libraries once their proprietor has passed away.
This Kat has been following
discussion on ownership (or lack thereof) of immaterial goods for some time. Readers sharing her same interests will remember that specific Katposts
started flowing after the article that the Wall
Street Journal published last summer, addressing an issue of fundamental concern to
many people: Who inherits your iTunes library?
|
Merpel has always liked analogue libraries best as you cannot hide in digital ones |
At the time the question just
received the laconic response: "Nobody".
This raised concerns among many people, including (but sadly the rumours soon
proved unfounded) Die Hard hero Bruce
Willis.
Unfortunately (although this
depends on the perspective you wish to adopt), not only this answer has not
changed, but has received judicial confirmation (following a bit of Kat
astrology) in the US a few weeks ago, when the US District Court for the
Southern District of New York issued its decision in Capitol
Records v ReDigi (noted here and here), holding that the first sale defence is limited to material items.
Prior to
the ReDigi decision, in 2010 the 9th Circuit issued its
judgment in Vernor v
Autodesk (a case concerning promo CDs), in which it ruled that, pursuant
to 17
USC §109(d) the
first sale doctrine does not apply to a person who possesses a copy of a
copyright-protected work without owning it.
In this respect, it is
significative that the terms and conditions of digital marketplaces (eg Amazon)
provide expressly that no ownership rights are acquired in the software or
music content.
In Europe the scenario,
despite last year's controversial CJEU decision in Case
C-128/11 UsedSoft,
might not be so different from the US, since the particular interpretation of
the principle of exhaustion provided by the Court therein related expressly
(yet solely?) to the Software
Directive.
This Kat is under the impression that there are more people thinking that they own their digital files than
people who don't. Being unable to resell them can thus be frustrating,but in the
years to come it might become even more frustrating to think (and accept) that
one's own digital legacy is destined to (legal) oblivion.
In the meanwhile, the
possibility offered by Google to decide what is going to happen to one's own account upon death (or other circumstances resulting in online inactivity) seems
something to be welcome.
Based on the CJEU decision in UsedSoft I think the situation for Europeans holding iTunes and the like will be different from that in the US (whatever that situation is). Before applying the 2009 Software Directive the CJEU held the licence amounted to a sale of the copy possessed by the user. This logic (which I disagree with) must equally apply to copies of digital content as it does to a software file delivered by download. Thus the downloader from iTunes (under licence) will own the copies they have downloaded in Europe and can pass them on to their hiers on death.
ReplyDeleteHowever they will not be able to resell, because exhaustion under the Software Directive will not apply to other than computer programs.