Well yes, I&#x27;m looking at it differently, that&#x27;s my whole point. The article is saying that if you defend one you must defend the other. My point is that if you look at things from a different perspective then it&#x27;s quite easy to defend one without defending the other.<p>It&#x27;s all about whether you look at libraries as an exception to copyright which has been carved out for the public good, or whether you look at libraries as something that is naturally allowed within copyright.<p>Put it another way: the article argues on the basis of a library&#x27;s <i>purpose</i>. I&#x27;m ignoring that, and merely looking at a library&#x27;s <i>right to exist</i>. If you see the purpose coming first, and the right to exist being created on the basis of that purpose, then the argument in the article holds. If you see the right to exist coming first, and the purpose merely being why people take advantage of that right, then you get my position.<p>Maybe this is one of those American versus European things. It looks from my cursory examination (and I could easily be wrong, and welcome a more informed opinion from anyone who knows better) that the doctrine of first sale is an American thing, and European laws give more rights to the copyright holder.