They should just force all these vendors to relabel those buttons to "Rent" or equivalent.
I like to call this "ownership light" and it would remove unilateral unaccountable suspension decisions from the equation.
The service provider is not burdened beyond reason and there is still a distinction made between this and "physical ownership" (e.g. no right to inherit / sell the content).
Are you saying this like it's a good thing?
I recently changed my mind on this and used to believe that digital goods should be treated identical to physical ones.
Fundamentally the nature of things make them different and we should recognize this when discussing what rights which party should get.
Whether the two facts I stated make sense is certainly up for debate, but I don't believe we can move forward insisting that rules imposed by the physicalness ( is this a word) are the same as rules imposed by human society.
The goal must be to find a set of rules that is fair to all participants and I'm certain this it is possible to do this.
Yeah. That will be a little less misleading. Also with an expiration date "Rent for 5 years". So people know what they are exactly paying for.
Perhaps they should make a less confusing service if they do not want their customers to be confused.