There are some possible arguments to question the validity of the rental, but I haven’t yet seen them brought up here.
Which arguments, that you know of, haven’t been brought up yet?
Sorry, I missed that earlier post.
One of them was mentioned, that the agreement between all of the earlier parties (producer-distributor-store) would need to be done correctly.
The other, I also hinted at; they are sometimes inconsistent in how they term the transaction. If they sometimes refer to the transaction as a sale, would that invalidate the “rental”? I don’t know.
One example is what I mentioned previously, that on the same CD it says:
“THIS CD IS BEING RENTED NOT SOLD
Ask your retailer for a copy of the rental agreement, also see enclosed copy”
and then it says:
???? ????? ?? ??????-???? ?????? ????? ??????? ??”? ???? ???? ??? ?????????
Also, on the Mostly Music website (Aderet), there are two options: Buy CD, and Buy Download.
Again, I am not claiming that this definitely overrides the terminology on the CD, but it’s something to think about. If during the online purchase process nothing is mentioned about a lease (anybody have experience with this?), then they shouldn’t be able to consider it one (unless you knew beforehand that the particular CD has a lease agreement inside).