Something tells me ReDigi has no users. Zero. Nada. They just got a database from somewhere (a store? a distributor? who knows!) and they pretend to be in the "recycling" business just to have an online front for money laundering.

Unbelievable that a law firm worth their weight would make an argument like that.

1. There's no "intrinsic property right" in a downloaded music file. Consumers purchase a license from itunes that only allows them a certain type of uses on a limited amount of devices. It states this clearly in the terms of service.

2. US law struck down the concept of a 2nd hand doctrine as it pertains to digital files years ago.  The concept theyre attempting to use only applies to reselling physical CDs. Just the smallest bit of legal research would have saved ReDigi, LegitMix, etc a lot of time and money.

You don't get it (don't take it personally, it's a bit technical):

ReDiGi didn't set up business to make money from "second hand Madonna mp3s". They set up business to launder money from who-knows-where.

So, the more costs and losses they can officially present in their books, the better. As lond as they don't end up in jail, it is worth the risk and the trouble.

but what you're proposing isn't technical at all, it's just a simple scam. I'm only arguing against the merits of their lawyers' claimed defenses. 

Old School Tricks- your above reply was not technical at all. You clearly are the one who doesn't get it (no offense). I don't think you understand the concept whatsoever (technically). MarvinB was closer in his comments, but still incorrect for the most part.

Technical Explanation:

Redigi claims to have developed software that can remove an MP3 from one user's hard drive and resell it to another user while never creating a new copy and ensuring that the seller is no longer able to access that file.From a technical standpoint, this is impossible. A new copy is clearly made. Anytime you transfer an MP3 or any file for that matter, one computer translates the file from the original hard drive (think of a high capacity CD) into a format readable by another computer and sends that information over the internet where the receiving computer interprets that data and recreates the file image on a separate hard drive, essentially making a copy. Whether or not that receiving computer is another consumer's computer or Redigi’s “cloud server” doesn’t matter. It is still a copy.

BUT… This argument has as much to do with consumer rights as it does with copyrights. 

The First Sale Doctrine is what allows consumers to re-sell original copyrighted works (Music, Books, Magazines) and has been part of copyright law since 1908. MarvinB stated that only physical CDs can be resold. This is not true. Even under in the strictest interpretation of copyright law, a “used” MP3 could be legally resold as long as the original copy is not re-copied to a new "container". (There are EULA arguments to be made here, but that I an entirely different conversation). Meaning... If you wanted to sell an MP3 that you legally purchased from iTunes, you could. You would just have to sell the entire hard drive that it was downloaded to. You can make as many copies as you want for your own personal use, but you cannot transfer it to a new container (e.g another hard drive) like Redigi's Locker Servers for the purpose of selling it to another consumer. That would be selling a "copy" of the original and you would need a distribution license from the copyright holder (music label/artist). 

The grey area is here: Copyright Law is way outdated. It was written in 1908 and last codified in 1976. Those who drafted the laws never anticipated the advent of the digital era. This is blatant in the wording of the laws themselves. But, there is no doubt that the original intention of the laws was to allow consumers the right to resell legally purchased copyrighted works.

Do consumers lose the right to resell just because music is purchased via the internet instead of at a physical record store? If advancements in technology can provide the same (or better) protections against illegal copyright use that were afforded by a physical CD then why should the First Sale Doctrine not be amended to account for digital distribution?

In my opinion, digital music downloads are just an inevitable advancement in the "container". Vinyl -> 8 track -> Tape -> CD -> MP3. Each format offered increased fidelity, but also made it easier for consumers to duplicate and distribute the content more easily. So if new technologies are developed that can ensure the same protections as previous “containers” (e.g. Not allowing a user access to a MP3 file once it has been resold to another user), then the consumer’s right to resell that copyrighted work should still apply and people should be able to resell their MP3’s and other legally purchased files through services that verify the legitimacy of the sale/transfer and that no copyright infringement took place.

I hope that clears up your "technical" argument.

So, we can re-sell ReDigi's "special software"? Give me a download link.

There is a very strong legal argument to be made here. I'm sure the attorney has done their research.

1. The consumer does have a right to resell copyrighted works as afforded by The First Sale Doctrine. What you are referring to is the consumer's agreement with the retailer (iTunes) or the End User License Agreement. That is a whole seperate issue, but a long as the agreement is between the user and Apple, Redigi is not liable as they never agreed to Apple's EULA. 
2. That is inaccurate. It applies to any ORIGINAL copyrighted work. So just as you couldn't sell a burned copy of a store bought CD (which is itself a copy of a master) without a distribution license, you cannot sell a "copy" of an MP3 without a ditribution license. But, there is room for argument here as the laws are based on how music and other media was distributed before the digital format and distribution via the internet became the standard. 

There is a very strong legal argument to be made here. I'm sure the attorney has done their research.

1. The consumer does have a right to resell copyrighted works as afforded by The First Sale Doctrine. What you are referring to is the consumer's agreement with the retailer (iTunes) or the End User License Agreement. That is a whole seperate issue, but a long as the agreement is between the user and Apple, Redigi is not liable as they never agreed to Apple's EULA. 

2. That is inaccurate. It applies to any ORIGINAL copyrighted work. So just as you couldn't sell a burned copy of a store bought CD (which is itself a copy of a master) without a distribution license, you cannot sell a "copy" of an MP3 without a ditribution license. But, there is room for argument here as the laws are based on how music and other media was distributed before the digital format and distribution via the internet became the standard. 

You can't resell digital audio files, unless they are the MASTER RECORDING(S).

Please don't pretend to be a lawyer online. You make fun of yourself and you mislead others with lies.

Digital recycling?  Fair enough, then.

So, can I resell the IP of ReDiGi? Say, their database?

re-selling mp3's? what a load of crap! 

Yet another money laundering circus. Hey, if the trick works, why change it, as old Italian mafia bosses used to say...