As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
Want to sell a used CD - hand out fingerprints
12gauge
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I have not heard anything about this topic on the forums, search function did not turn up anything either (or I am too dumb to use it), so:
It further states that
but
Full article here.
I know that the record labels are trying everything in their hands to keep their profits from going down, but this is pretty much outrageous - basically you are being treated like a potential criminal (although customer buying CDs/DVDs should be used to that by now).
Now I have to admit that I don't know if those laws are actually getting enforced. The article states that this is not the case typically, but further down it mentions first checks. Can someone explain me the situtation?
P.S.: Games are also mentioned, but with less harch requirements:
The National Assn. of Recording Merchandisers outside counsel, John Mitchell, an attorney with Washington, D.C.-based Interaction Law, reports that Florida and Utah have passed second-hand goods legislation, sometimes referred to as pawn-shop laws, that could make the buying and selling of used CDs much more onerous to stores and less attractive to customers looking to sell music they are no longer interested in owning.
In Florida, the new legislation requires all stores buying second-hand merchandise for resale to apply for a permit, would be required to thumb-print CD sellers and get a copy of their state-issued identity documents, such as a driver's license. Furthermore, stores could only issue store credit -- not pay cash -- in exchange for traded CDs, and then would be required to hold them for a 30-day period, before re-selling them.
It further states that
While most states have pawn shop laws, they are not typically enforced against all sellers of second hand merchandise. But as a precaution, most merchants, including record stores owners, already collect ID from individuals selling previously owned goods.
but
In the states where pawn shop laws are getting more restrictive, it practically makes it prohibitive to sell used CDs, says one merchant. In fact, one music retailer -- who operates stores in Florida but is not headquartered there -- reports that one of the chain's stores has already had a visit from the local police enforcing the law. As a result, the chain stopped dealing in used goods in that store.
Full article here.
I know that the record labels are trying everything in their hands to keep their profits from going down, but this is pretty much outrageous - basically you are being treated like a potential criminal (although customer buying CDs/DVDs should be used to that by now).
Now I have to admit that I don't know if those laws are actually getting enforced. The article states that this is not the case typically, but further down it mentions first checks. Can someone explain me the situtation?
P.S.: Games are also mentioned, but with less harch requirements:
Meanwhile, video and video game retailers are less hit. Stores selling previously owned video and video games do not need a permit, and only have to wait for 15 days before reselling the merchandise.
12gauge on
0
Posts
It's (being claimed as) a means to deter theft: if they collect ID and fingerprints, you can't use a pawn shop/used CD store/etc to fence your goods.
The way I understand it is that they want you to buy as much legal copies are you can (two copies of each album) , but don't you fucking dare think about selling one of those copies.
I'm just cynical about the effect on sales this will have once people start realizing it's happening, and where the blame for said impact will be placed.
That is an unjust law.
It's not for eBay, it's for middleman resellers. If you're selling something on ebay, then presumably you can be tracked through eBay's payment system so if you're selling stolen goods, the police have a way of tracking you down. If you pawn a bunch of stolen stuff and get paid in cash, that doesn't hold.
That said, the fingerprints might be a bit much.
I understand ID for selling stuff, because of stolen goods and all that. But this is just getting ridiculous.
It's not a knee-jerk reaction, it's just that before it didn't matter that the pawn-shop laws weren't applied. Now for some reason, someone has decided that they do.
And probably because of piracy.
It's all inter-related, no matter how many times they say it's not because of piracy. The RIAA controls EVERYTHING.
Or perhaps there was a high-profile rash of CD thefts, or the governor's cousin got robbed and had his stuff sold at a used CD store, or a pawn shop owners' association complained, or whatever.
But fuck that, let's blame the RIAA for everything. The Iraq war? RIAA's fault. AIDS? RIAA's fault. Computer not working? Wait, nevermind on that one.
Anyway, I never sell CDs, so they will never have my fingerprints. Then again I work at a police station, so they already have my fingerprints in the system. Oh well.
fix'd, fucking blue pill :P
I do not think this has anything to do with piracy - I think it's more about stopping sharing profits by stomping out the second hand market - there were rumors before the PS3 launch of Sony making games only play on one PS3 to stop reselling. I see these kind of laws in the same light.
welcome.
to the desert.
or the RIAAL.
I approve
I just bought £40 worth of stuff from Amazon using your referral link. So you better had be
MAFIAA hates it when people buy second-hand, because then 100% of the profit goes to the store. Can't have that, can we?
As the groups like the RIAA do not get a cut of the second hand market, the folks at Ars suggest that this will be an advantage for these groups, as it puts more people in the position of buying a new product, which they do get a cut from, over the second hand alternative.
Now this doesn't necessarily mean that this law was passed specifically because of pressure groups like the RIAA, but I cannot see them stepping up to remove it.
Its my property, cockfucks, im' tired of this "licensee" bullshit
Downside - most receipts are printed on thermal paper, which usually fades within a few months (some stores use a really good thermal paper that doesn't fade for a long while). You would have to copy your receipts to inkjet or laser printouts so they last longer.
In England all you need is the numbers off the receipt, not even the receipt itself.
So you could have a hand written note copy if you wanted.
Those are copies that they aren't getting paid for. They probably do see that as piracy.
Seriously though, who steals and fences CDs anymore? A dozen used discs will get you about $5 total.
But it's not going to kill the secondhand market anyway, it's only going to move the secondhand market from local shops to places like eBay.
Actually, I wouldn't at all be surprised if they had a hand in this. These are the people that want money from every mp3 player and blank disc sold, and I recall hearing them whine about used CD's long ago too. The only difference here is that unlike their railing against fair use, this kind of law just happens to have legs to stand on thanks to fences.
Edit: And for the record, while I do buy off Ebay, I much prefer second hand shops, where I can inspect the CD/case for damage. This law is not a path I want to go down.
Here's the deal: you are either a pawn shop or a seller of goods under the Uniform Commercial Code for most purposes. A normal shop could potentially, as a good faith purchaser, have rights to stolen games above those of the real owner. If they are treated as a pawn shop, you, as a target of the theft, would have superior rights to those goods, meaning you come in, check their log, and get your games back. Obviously, this is the quickie version - I'm not pulling out my UCC - but you get the idea.
So, in short, this is a slight nuisance if you sell your used games and CDs, in exchange for the opportunity to get your stuff back.
Apparently some schools in America now have student fingerprints on file. Im pretty sure over here that would be wildly illegal.
Even the legality of it here is in question, but who wants to bother suing a school? It's not like they have any money.
I've seen plenty of advertising to parents urging them to fingerprint their kids just in case they get kidnapped or something. You know, give up a little privacy for a little security.
And people accept this? I thought this was a nation that's terrified of bad men stealing their identities and mega-hertz. And they're willing to just hand that sort of invasive information over for $5 store credit?
It's kind of terrifying when you think about it... this isn't even the government. Giant corporations are collecting a fingerprint database. Perhaps a DNA database next.
I don't think people would be as willing to give blood/hair/jizz samples as they are to give fingerprints, but hey, who knows?