It was argued not long ago that the selling of second hand physical items such as music CD's, DVD movies and so on should be illegal and that it constituted a copyright breach - of course, it was the media giants who initiated this argument and who, thankfully, lost their fight to stop people selling on media they no longer use.
But whilst it is now perfectly legal to sell your unwanted CD's, it has been ruled that you cannot sell your second hand downloads because these items apparently downloaded media doesn't carry the "first sale doctrine" like physical media does.
A company called "ReDigi" was sued by Capitol Records in January 2012 for "making unauthorised copies of music" although the company insist's that all users first download proprietary software which verifies the music was bought legally before removing the download from the users computer and uploading to their own servers for re-sale.
Now, many people may argue that there was nothing stopping the owner from making a copy of the download before hand, and this would appear to be the argument of the ruling, or at least the ruling says it is much easier to make copies of "downloaded" music, but the fact is a copy can be made of most CD's and DVD's with minimum effort these days, even those media's which are protected can be ripped using freely available rippers so the argument that second hand downloaded material cannot be sold second hand because of duplication potential it an extremely weak and flawed one, but one which doesn't surprise me given the media giants attitudes.
Question is, do you think the sale of second hand downloads should be legal or do you think a download is vulnerable and should be prevented from being resold?