This is how things should be and I really hope we arrive at this in the future.
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).
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.
If I buy a movie on a DVD, should I be allowed to sell it when I'm done with it? If so, what's the difference between that and selling a digital copy when I'm done with it from the copyright owner's perspective?
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).