Aaron Perzanowski (4:53)

Property law, especially when it comes to personal property, is quite rigid, right? Like the property law does not allow the sale of an item to be subject to post sale restrictions imposed by the seller, right? You can't sell me a pair of shoes with a bunch of legal strings attached that say you're only allowed to wear these shoes on the weekend and you can't get them wet. So I'll give you a great example. This book called the Castaway. It was published in 1908. This was the subject of the first US Supreme Court for sale decision. This is a first edition of the book which I got on ebay. I don't know if you can read this, but it says the price of this book at retail is $1 net. No dealer is licensed to sell it at a less price and sale at a less price will be treated as an infringement of the copyright. Macy's tried to sell the book for less than that price and they took the case all the way to the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court said that's not a thing you get to do. You can write that in the front of your book, but no one has to pay attention to it, right? And a hundred years later, we live in a world where basically every product you buy comes with something akin to that restriction, right? There's a license that you agree to when you bought a new laptop. There are license terms that govern the software in every new vehicle on the road. And that gives manufacturers this incredible degree of power to restrict resale of the products that we buy, to restrict the way we use the products that we buy, and to restrict the repair of the products that we buy. So fundamentally, I think that's, that's the core of the problem.

Dena Temple Raston (6:51)

One example of this happened in 2009 when Amazon overnight deleted copies of 1984 and other novels from people's Kindles without notice.

Aaron Perzanowski (7:02)

The founder and CEO of Amazon.com, jeff Bezos, says he's sorry Bezos wrote this. This is an apology for the way we previously handled illegally sold copies of 1984 and other novels on Kindle. Our solution to the problem was stupid, thoughtless, and painfully out of line with our principles. The publisher or the bookseller could never come into your house and take that book away because they decided they don't want you to have it anymore. But that's power that technology companies like Amazon do in fact have. So you go to bed thinking you own a copy of 1984 and you wake up the next morning to find that it has been memory holed. And I think that's a really disturbing moment for a lot of consumers, in part because it takes something away from them that they have paid for, but also because it reveals how little control they really have over this technology.

Interviewer/Host (7:59)

Now, I think the other thing that people have sort of twigged onto is the way software is treated differently from other things we buy. Why is it that software and digital products seem to be sort of special in the eyes of the law?

Aaron Perzanowski (8:14)

The software industry attempted to kind of reposition these transactions not as sales, where I buy a product from a company for a one time price, but as licenses. As anyone who's ever tried to read a license agreement can tell you, there are lots of rules and restrictions and limitations. And the licensing mechanism was seen by the software industry as a way to give them control over their products that they wouldn't otherwise have.

Interviewer/Host (8:47)

My thought was when say I had Microsoft Windows or whatever it was, was the reason I got the license or the reason why they still had control was because they were still going to send me updates to make sure that there was nothing wrong with the software was that sort of a bait and switch, or was I totally naive?

Aaron Perzanowski (9:03)

No, no, no, no. I don't think that's totally naive. I do think this is an important differentiation. Software updates are necessary, updates in particular, but the license is not necessary in order for those updates to be offered. Right. Those things are intertwined, but I think they could be decoupled in a way that would give consumers access to ongoing support, ongoing updates, without requiring them to sort of sacrifice their ownership interest in the version of the product that they initially purchased.

Interviewer/Host (9:39)

You know, when you talk about the Internet of things, you talk about it as the Internet of things you don't own. What do you mean by that?

Aaron Perzanowski (9:49)

Most of us have a sense that when we buy a product, we bring it home, we put it in our living rooms, wherever it might be, that we control these devices. As soon as these devices connect to a network, to the Internet, as soon as they depend on software for their functionality, there's a real sense in which consumers are at the mercy of the companies that are selling them these devices. We see this really clearly when companies decide they no longer want to support a particular device and they say, we're no longer going to push out software updates and in fact, we're going to push out one final update that turns this device you bought into a useless brick.

Dena Temple Raston (10:33)

So what does it mean when the things we own are changed without our permission? And if ownership is indeed starting to slip, who's trying to take it back? That's next after the break. Support for Clickure comes from Quince. Lately, I've been more intentional about what I wear day to day, leaning into pieces that feel effortless, comfortable, but still put together. It just makes getting dressed less of a chore. And for a while now, Quince has been my go to. The fabrics feel elevated, the fits are flattering, and everything just works without overthinking it. Quince makes it easy to refresh your everyday this spring with pieces that feel as good as they look. They use premium materials like 100% European linen, organic cotton and ultra soft denim. Their lightweight linen pants, dresses and tops start at $30 and are effortless, breathable and easy to wear on repeat. Everything at Quint's is priced 50 to 80% less than similar brands. They work directly with ethical factories and cut out the middlemen. So you're paying for quality and craftsmanship, not brand markup. I just got a Quince bathing suit that looks like one of those expensive European brands, but for a fraction of the price. Refresh your everyday with luxury. You'll actually use head to quince.com clickhere for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. Now available in Canada too. That's Q-U-I-N-C-E.com clickhere for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com click here support comes from wise

Mike Pesca (12:21)

the smart way to manage the currencies you need around the globe. Fed up with losing out to hidden fees when you send your money abroad with your everyday bank? Choose the smart way Wise you can count on the exchange rate you'd usually find on Google. No unwelcome surprises. Plus, ditch that where's my money feeling. Most transfers arrive in under 20 seconds. Join Millions Saving billions on hidden fees. Be smart, get wise. Download the Wise app today. Ts and Cs apply hi, I'm Mike

Mike Pesca (12:51)

Pesca, host of the Gist, the longest running podcast on news and analysis in the business. Every day I do, I think, a fascinating interview, but I also do a spiel where I will challenge you because I hate listening to podcasts that just agree with each other and only agree with me. So I'm going to say 25% of the time you'll say, mike, I think you're wrong. And 75% of the time you'll say, great point. Well said. Now those numbers might be reversed. For some people. They probably shouldn't listen. Check out the gist Every single day for a decade. Now

Dena Temple Raston (13:24)

you're listening to Click here. I'm Dena Temple Roster, welcome back. When we buy a product, we like to think we own it because we can hold it in our hands and use it. But today, a large part of how we access media is much less tangible. We use streaming platforms or connect to the cloud. Our movies, our books, our music, increasingly, they're not things we keep, they're things we log into. Aaron Perzinowski says we should be concerned about that.

Aaron Perzanowski (13:57)

So I worry a lot about what it means when we consolidate and centralize control over culture in the hands of a small number of firms. We've seen this play out over the decades. We're seeing it play out right now in cable channel and streaming and movie studio acquisitions that are in the news. And I think there are real reasons to worry about this. One reason to worry is cultural preservation. So we talked earlier about Amazon removing copies of 1984 from People's Kindles, and that's a real problem. Amazon could just as easily, with the cooperation of a publisher, rewrite 1984, right? They can make changes to the text and push that text out to consumers who think they bought this book. When you publish a new edition of a book, the old hardcover copies are still there. They're still floating around. Right. When you make changes to digital materials, there's a real possibility that they simply displace what was already there. And so that opens the door to sort of revisionist history of our culture, again, not inconsistent with what we see in 1984 itself.

Interviewer/Host (15:18)

So, I mean, the point you're making is that this is far beyond just inconvenience, that what really happens to markets and innovation and culture if things are truly not owned by the people who buy them, is that they can change.

Aaron Perzanowski (15:34)

I think it's a real worry. It's one we have to take seriously. We have seen real documented examples where publishers are willing to rewrite the facts of history, to rewrite the facts of biology or evolution, to meet these sort of ideological litmus tests. When we move that tendency into the digital space, I'm very concerned about what that means for the historical record.

Interviewer/Host (16:06)

So at Click Here, we talk a lot about how technology and change doesn't just have to wash over you, that you as an individual have agency.

Dena Temple Raston (16:16)

Are there ways people are pushing back against this?

Interviewer/Host (16:19)

I mean, do you see movements, either legal ones or cultural ones, that are trying to restore some of those ownership rights?

Aaron Perzanowski (16:27)

I do. I think there's a really big unmet need for genuine ownership. And we see that reflected in a few ways. One thing we're seeing is a return to tangible media. Obviously, the music industry is still dominated by streaming services, Spotify, Apple Music, et cetera. But if you look at vinyl record sales over the last 10 years, they tell a story of a committed group of consumers, a growing group of consumers who are willing to spend lots more money to acquire music that they genuinely own. We're seeing something similar happen in the film industry as well, right as more people are starting to actually think, hey, maybe I should buy this movie on a disc so that I get to have it and play it whenever I want, instead of hoping that next month it's still on one of the nine streaming services that I'm paying for. So that, I think, is a market response. I think the clearest example of a legal response to these problems is this right to repair movement that has been very effective in the United States over the past five or six years at getting state level laws passed that protect crucial ownership interests of consumers. So more than 100 million Americans now live in states that have passed right to repair legislation. So that, I think, is also a reflection of this deep desire for greater control over the products that we buy, the products that we use.

Interviewer/Host (18:10)

So you've been digging into this for a while. What would a healthier version of ownership look like in the future? And how do you think we build a digital world where people still feel like the things they buy are actually theirs?

Aaron Perzanowski (18:23)

This is such an important question. It matters for creators that people see the work that they bring into the world as something that is valuable, as something that is unique. When we treat music or movies not even like commodities, but like utilities, right? I pay my monthly music bill and then I just listen to whatever the algorithm happens to feed me. That is not a recipe for music fandom. So I think artists have to take consumer ownership seriously too, because it has a direct impact on the viability of their careers long term. If you can get some agreement between the creative community and consumers, I think we can build a kind of ownership that largely replicates what we saw in the analog era, right? What consumers want is pretty straightforward. They want the right to buy things that are theirs permanently. They want to be able to buy things that are not going to disappear, that are not going to be altered, that are not going to be replaced with a new version that they didn't sign up for. And I think ultimately what matters to consumers is the sense that they're getting a fair deal, right?

Interviewer/Host (19:54)

Aaron Perzanowski, thanks so much for being with us. I learned a lot.

Aaron Perzanowski (19:58)

It was great talking with you.

Dena Temple Raston (20:03)

Technology has been quietly reshaping ownership for years, often without us even noticing. And that leaves us with a choice. Do we accept the shift or push back on it? Maybe it starts small, like buying physical copies of books and movies and music. It doesn't feel like much, but it restores something that's been slipping away. Control. This is Click Here. Click Here is a production of Recorded Future News and prx. Today's show was written and produced by Megan Dietre, Sean Powers, Erica Giga, Zach Hirsch, and Casey Georgie. It was edited by Karen Duffin and Sarah Covedo and fact checked by Darren Ancrum. Original music is by Ben Levingston, with additional music from Blue Dots Sessions. Our staff writer is Lucas Riley, our illustrator is Megan Gough, and our sound designers and engineers are Jake Cook and Jesse Niswonger. I'm Dina Temple Raston, and thanks for listening.

Mike Pesca (21:29)

Support for this program comes from Recorded Future. In cybersecurity, the biggest risk isn't what can be seen, it's what gets missed. Recorded Future analyzes billions of signals to help organizations stay ahead of threats. Recorded Future Know what matters?

Recorded Future Announcer (21:43)

Act first Looking for more of the cybersecurity and intelligence coverage you get on? Click Here, Then check out our sister publication the Record from Recorded Future News. You'll get breaking cyber news from reporters in New York, Washington, London, and Kyiv, among others, and you'll see for yourself why it attracts hundreds of thousands of page views every month. Just go to the Record Media.