Okay Warriors...What Is Your Definition Of RR, MRR and PLR

by Steven Wagenheim 57 replies
I've been in this business for over 8 years and still can't seem to get 2 people
to agree on what rights come with RR, MRR and PLR products.

Basically, this is my understanding from what I've personally learned from
some of the top guns.

RR (resale rights) - Can simply resale the product. Cannot pass on rights
and cannot modify the product.

MRR (Master release rights) - Can resale the product but can also pass on
the rights to others. However, cannot modify contents.

PLR (Private label rights) - Can resale the product, can pass on rights to
others and can modify the product.

If it's that cut and dried, then why do we so often see rights files attached
with all these "can's and can'ts?"

For example, I've seen PLR where you can modify the product but the
original seller says you can't pass on the rights.

To me, that kind of puts it in between RR and PLR.

And I can keep going with all the restrictions, such as can't sell at auction
sites, can't add to membership sites, etc.

So what is your definition of each and can we finally put an end to the
confusion surrounding rights because quite honestly, after all these years,
I myself have reached a point where I am not even sure what's what
anymore, especially when you start getting into all the different exclusions.

Anyway, let's have a discussion on this and see if we can't come to some
kind of agreement.
#main internet marketing discussion forum #definition #mrr #plr #warriorswhat
Avatar of Unregistered
  • Profile picture of the author Bill Farnham
    So what is your definition of each and can we finally put an end to the confusion surrounding rights because quite honestly, after all these years,
    I myself have reached a point where I am not even sure what's what anymore, especially when you start getting into all the different exclusions.
    Steven,

    Which poster are we supposed to believe has the right answer?

    ~Bill
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3223912].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author E. Brian Rose
    The rights of each product are defined by the product creator and detailed in the notice that usually accompanies it. If I create a product and sell it, then I want to define what the product can and can't be used for. I certainly don't want some standard definition created in a chat forum or elsewhere to define how my product can and can't be used.
    Signature
    My New Video Series is Free (for now)
    Crazy good marketing tips from the founder of JVZoo.
    Get EBR 365 Now!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3223947].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
    Steven,

    I agree with your definition of RR. For MRR, I'd make it clear that only the resale rights could be sold on (not the MRR).

    The creator of a PLR product decides what rights to pass on. Usually they include the right to modify the product, add one's own name etc.

    However, if a PLR product has a limited release, it's perfectly logical not to allow resale rights (unless it's been significantly altered) in order to preserve its value. Otherwise, there'd be no point in limiting the numbers.


    Frank
    Signature
    I've just put Richard Branson's number on speed-dial. I call it my "Get-Rich-Quick" scheme.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3223964].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tim Franklin
    Excellent post and I agree 100 percent, I have come across PLR products that in the sales copy plainly stated that it was un-restricted then when I opened it up I found restrictions, I call that deceptive.

    Cant sell at auctions, cant sell here, cant sell there, cant take PLR and sell as a wso, cant do this cant do that, in fact I found so many things that you cant do that I felt like throwing up my hands and saying what can I do with this stuff and why did I buy it to begin with?

    so I am with you on this topic.

    There are several points to make here and you have done a great job on bringing out the many differences in products rights, I believe that it is a two way street, however often you see in license files only those rights that the seller claims is valid and no mention is made that the buyer has any rights at all.


    This is all about to change, simply becuase of the revised, 16 CFR Part 255

    The FTC
    Has begun a process of labeling what is decceptive and what is not deceptive but they stop short of actually legally defining what that may be, mostly because the FTC has no legal authority to do so YET. (notice I say Yet)

    I say that mostly because the law is a funny thing more so in the US than in other places, however, Internet Marketing is in the cross hairs of the FTC make no mistake about that and PLR along with many other types of internet marketing products will have to change, as I am sure it will, I do not claim to be an expert, but I know this much, there have been a lot of criminals loose on the internet selling a great many things and that is about to end and it will not be long before we start to see examples being made.

    This is one reason why I feel this is a great post and it needs to be not only discussed but defined.

    Here is my take on PLR,

    1. On Private Label Rights, many product creators do not seem to tender the application of Intellictual Property rights, If I as a buyer, take PLR and make it over in my own way, it becomes mine, (how much does that require?) that likely is a matter for the courts and it is likely not something that will come before a court any time soon, but likely 40 to 60 percent would be considered correct and applicable.

    The point I have is this, If I take a PLR product and turn it into something so totally different that you can no longer recognize what it was from what it started out as, then its mine now, and if I want to sell it on an auction site, I am going to do just that and I would dare anyone to stop me from doing exactly what ever I wanted to do with that converted PLR material.

    If a product creator wants to place restrictions on PLR material, they should be selling MRR or RR or some other confusing limited rights products, not PLR, once a thing becomes private, then it is just that private, that is also a matter of law.

    Onto a second point,

    2. Venue of law, in every situation the law may be applied differently, if you live in a country that has little or no law that would apply to this issue then how do you seek any type of clarification, the answer is you cannot.

    Conversely, if you live in a state in the US where they have certain laws that provide protection to certain aspects of legal precedence, then that law takes the form of how it is applied to your individual situation, one of the most interesting things to me is when I read disclaimers that require an individual to give up all their rights in order to make use of a product.

    Disclaimers, final point, (for now anyway)

    it used to be enough to just make a disclaimer, stating that results are not typical, a legal safe harbor, that for many years has withstood the tests of time, but times they are a changing, no longer are disclaimers good enough, not for the FTC anyway.

    You might wonder how this effects the topic, well consider this, if you advertise that your Product, PLR, or what ever it is, will do a particular thing for a particular person, you had better be able to prove it, with scientific methods, (read the revised 16 CFR Part 255) note the emphasis on revised.

    I believe not only is this a good topic to discuss but it is a must, because if we fail to self regulate this industry the government will do it for us they have said as much in writing, again see the revised documents, presented by the FTC, The number one reason why I bring this up for discussion is this, central fact,

    Opps my final final point, really,

    what is deceptive, what is not deceptive.


    It is not what you think is deceptive, it is based on what "they" think is deceptive, if your PLR product fails to mention that a buyer has rights provided under law, and only represents that the seller has the right to restrict the use of the product, then that statement is deceptive, think about that for a moment.

    That is why I say that this discussion is not only important but it is something that is imperative both from a legal standpoint and from a private standpoint, simply put there really should be a standard, in a grey world where it is sometimes difficult to determine what is true and what is false, discussion is the only way forward.
    Signature
    Software Development | Applications | OSX | iOS | Android | Cloud Software Engineering |
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3224303].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
      Tim, your reply deserves more than just a thanks button.

      Well said...very well said.

      And I couldn't agree with you more.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3224340].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alminc
      Originally Posted by Tim Franklin View Post

      Here is my take on PLR,

      1. On Private Label Rights, many product creators do not seem to tender the application of Intellictual Property rights, If I as a buyer, take PLR and make it over in my own way, it becomes mine, (how much does that require?) that likely is a matter for the courts and it is likely not something that will come before a court any time soon, but likely 40 to 60 percent would be considered correct and applicable.

      The point I have is this, If I take a PLR product and turn it into something so totally different that you can no longer recognize what it was from what it started out as, then its mine now, and if I want to sell it on an auction site, I am going to do just that and I would dare anyone to stop me from doing exactly what ever I wanted to do with that converted PLR material.
      I would just add here: then even the copyright is mine!

      They always point that you don't own the copyright when you
      puchase PLR content. They only can clame copyright to their
      original, unchanged PLR content, but if I change it e.g. 75%
      how can they still clame the copyright?

      .
      Signature
      No links :)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225489].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Doug Wakefield
        Originally Posted by Alminc View Post

        I would just add here: then even the copyright is mine!

        They always point that you don't own the copyright when you
        puchase PLR content. They only can clame copyright to their
        original, unchanged PLR content, but if I change it e.g. 75%
        how can they still clame the copyright?

        .
        If you were changing it by that much I wouldn't think they could.

        Of course my definition of PLR states that you are pretty much selling any copyrighting with the product as is. How can I allow you to claim yourself as the author, yet keep the copyright of the articles myself if you do happen to use them as is.

        My main right that I am concerned about is that I do not want my PLR resold as PLR.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225548].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Andyhenry
    Hey Steven,

    I feel you.

    I've wondered about this too. I've almost bought a lot of 'unrestricted plr' stuff only to see a bunch of exclusions which include what I wanted to do with it.

    I think the IM niche has done its usual trick and applied terms to things which don't belong and ended up using labels that are not appropriate.

    I think in IM people know that others want PLR - so that's what they want to call their offer - they just don't want to actually deliver that, so they add a bunch of exclusions.

    It's like going to a restaurant and ordering a chicken salad and finding out there's a piece of chicken and some cucumber and them telling you "that's what we call a salad".

    It's just IMers trying to give you what they want but call it what you want.
    Signature

    nothing to see here.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3224451].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tim Franklin
      @Steven Wagenheim coming from your sir, it is a great honor,


      Andy, I love the analogy of the salad, that is exactly how I feel sometimes.

      I have even seen peperoni, in my salad, when I asked the guy what was up with the peperoni, he said, that's not my department, you can contact support and hopefully they will help you out, (a joke but an actual reply I received one time when asking about a product) not the peperoni, that was just an analogy,
      Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

      Hey Steven,

      I feel you.

      I've wondered about this too. I've almost bought a lot of 'unrestricted plr' stuff only to see a bunch of exclusions which include what I wanted to do with it.

      I think the IM niche has done its usual trick and applied terms to things which don't belong and ended up using labels that are not appropriate.

      I think in IM people know that others want PLR - so that's what they want to call their offer - they just don't want to actually deliver that, so they add a bunch of exclusions.

      It's like going to a restaurant and ordering a chicken salad and finding out there's a piece of chicken and some cucumber and them telling you "that's what we call a salad".

      It's just IMers trying to give you what they want but call it what you want.
      Signature
      Software Development | Applications | OSX | iOS | Android | Cloud Software Engineering |
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3224592].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Brandon Tanner
        There is no such thing as a "standard" set of rights for PLR (or RR, or MRR). These "rights" can vary greatly from product to product, so regardless of what anyone tells you, you need to check with the creator/seller of each product to make sure that you understand what your rights are for that particular product.

        That said, it's a good rule of thumb to never purchase a PLR/RR/MRR product unless the exact rights are clearly stated on the sales page.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3224741].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author J.M.Wilson
    My definitions are exactly the same as your Steven.

    It irks me when I download a PLR product and get ready to make it my own only to find the author has placed limitations on it... one recent example was I couldn't remove the box at the end of the report advertising this persons product.

    I mean, that's not PLR. It's MRR at best.

    PLR is full rights to do what you like with a product. Well, at least to me it is!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3224548].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tina Golden
      It really doesn't matter what we each end up defining these here - it's not going to change the fact that rights will still be different depending on who you buy from.

      I do agree that for me, PLR should include pretty much anything I want to do with the exception of selling it on as PLR without substantial changes. For all of my personally created PLR, that's what I give for rights. Makes an easy license...lol.

      Tina
      Signature
      Discover how to have fabulous, engaging content with
      Fast & Easy Content Creation
      ***Especially if you don't have enough time, money, or just plain HATE writing***
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3224582].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author micromike

        I do agree that for me, PLR should include pretty much anything I want to do with the exception of selling it on as PLR without substantial changes. For all of my personally created PLR, that's what I give for rights. Makes an easy license...lol.

        Tina
        exactly my point...and a thanks to you
        Signature

        "Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment".

        "We're the DARK SIDE... and you're SURPRISED we lied about the cookies?"

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225681].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author drmani
    Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim View Post

    Basically, this is my understanding from what I've personally learned from
    some of the top guns.

    RR (resale rights) - Can simply resale the product. Cannot pass on rights
    and cannot modify the product.

    MRR (Master release rights) - Can resale the product but can also pass on
    the rights to others. However, cannot modify contents.

    PLR (Private label rights) - Can resale the product, can pass on rights to
    others and can modify the product.

    If it's that cut and dried, then why do we so often see rights files attached
    with all these "can's and can'ts?"

    For example, I've seen PLR where you can modify the product but the
    original seller says you can't pass on the rights.
    I'm no lawyer, and do not vouch for the accuracy of what I'm saying here, but this is what I have always *understood* the terms to mean.

    Resell rights - license to sell a product to others

    Master resell rights - license to sell a product AND the resell rights to others

    Private label rights - license to label a product as one's own creation, and/or modify/edit/add/remove from it as desired

    The only difference from the definitions you outlined would be that PLR has no bearing whatsoever on the RR and MRR. Since the product is YOUR OWN, after you have edited/modified it, you have ALL rights to it.

    As to the license document that accompanies PLR products, I suspect that the rules would apply to use of the product WITHOUT further modification. PLR is the right to modify and rebrand as one's own. But unless the change is significant enough for it to become a DIFFERENT product from the original, the rights as defined by the original creator must apply (I guess).

    Maybe someone should get an expert like Bob Silber over to comment on this discussion.

    All success
    Dr.Mani
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3224882].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JustinBrooke
      In our world we call it RR, MRR, PLR... But out in the real world
      it's just called licensing. When you are selling a license to something
      you are supposed to include a license agreement.

      In fact the license agreement should be signed before the sale
      and definitely anyone adding a surprise to the license after the
      sale is in fact committing some sort of wrong doing.

      If I was a lawyer, I would have used a better phrase for it but
      I'm not. Also we should not be locking ourselves into just RR,
      MRR, and PLR because they don't offer flexibility.

      You are the product/content owner, you have the power to
      license it however you want and I should not be dictated by
      the warriorforum of all places as to what is fair and not fair in
      my licensing agreements.

      All too often our subscribers and customers "grow up" here in
      the warriorforum and then think PLR is actually something that
      other serious business owners actually know about.

      Go ask Seth Godin, Guy Kawasaki, Mike Arrington, Arianna
      Huffington, Donald Trump, Robert Allen, or any serious businesman
      if they have ever offered or bought RR, MLR, or PLR.

      Then when they look confused... Use the word "Licensing"
      and watch them instantly understand you.
      Signature

      You ROCK!,
      Justin Brooke

      FREE: spreadsheet of 182 traffic sources (no opt-in)

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3224976].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Roaddog
        Personally, I think Justin hit the most important point.

        Whatever terms should be upfront. A license

        There is a lot of ambiguity in a lot of IM terms, let alone what would hold up in court.

        PLR MMR RR.

        Are these even legal terms?

        Edit*

        I'll give an example, when I was in construction you had to sign a contract with defined terms,
        before a deal was sealed. You can't suddenly come along and start redefining the contract after it was signed.
        Any changes in the terms and or particulars to that contract required, a change order which in itself is an addition to the original contract.

        Unless your upfront with a contract or license,
        I highly doubt it's worth the pixels it's written on.
        Call it whatever you want.



        I could call myself Cinderella.... Doesn't mean I'm missing a slipper



        Jim




        Originally Posted by JustinBrooke View Post

        In our world we call it RR, MRR, PLR... But out in the real world
        it's just called licensing. When you are selling a license to something
        you are supposed to include a license agreement.

        In fact the license agreement should be signed before the sale
        and definitely anyone adding a surprise to the license after the
        sale is in fact committing some sort of wrong doing.


        If I was a lawyer, I would have used a better phrase for it but
        I'm not. Also we should not be locking ourselves into just RR,
        MRR, and PLR because they don't offer flexibility.


        Then when they look confused... Use the word "Licensing"
        and watch them instantly understand you.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3337329].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Bill Farnham
      Originally Posted by drmani View Post

      Maybe someone should get an expert like Bob Silber over to comment on this discussion.
      Perhaps one additonal piece that could be added to the discussion is a table of rights like the kind you normally see with PLR, MRR, and RR.

      That would be the:

      [YES]
      [NO]

      blocks that we are all familiar with.

      If there was indeed a concensus to the point where we could copy/paste that block that may help as well. I know you can't cover every situation with one set of license blocks, but it may be a start.

      Just a thought...

      ~Bill
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225015].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Matt Bard
        Originally Posted by Bill Farnham View Post

        ...I know you can't cover every situation with one set of license blocks, but it may be a start.
        Bill, I like this idea and really when you think about it, it wouldn't be that difficult to cover most situations.

        An example could be:

        Giveaway Rights [Yes] [No]

        Can be given away through:

        Email Subscription Forms [Yes] [No]
        Public Forums [Yes] [No]
        Public Blogs [Yes] [No]
        Private Sites (Membership Forums / Blogs) [Yes] [No]
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225517].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Andyhenry
      Originally Posted by drmani View Post


      Private label rights - license to label a product as one's own creation, and/or modify/edit/add/remove from it as desired

      Since the product is YOUR OWN, after you have edited/modified it, you have ALL rights to it.
      In which case - you wouldn't expect a list of "cannot"'s attached to that about where you can't sell it or how much you must charge.
      Signature

      nothing to see here.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225030].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author drmani
        Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

        In which case - you wouldn't expect a list of "cannot"'s attached to that about where you can't sell it or how much you must charge.
        Absolutely.

        Those 'conditions' are perfectly valid for RR and MRR licenses, though... as
        long as they are clearly defined PRIOR to the sale, and not tacked on after,
        or even left unclear until after the sale.

        Another interesting variation is the 'hosted reseller' approach, where the vendor
        controls the selling process, including pricing, with 100% of the sales revenue
        going to the licensee (scripts like RAP make this possible, with the instant
        payout via PayPal option)

        All success
        Dr.Mani
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225050].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Matt Bard
    Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

    I think the IM niche has done its usual trick and applied terms to things which don't belong and ended up using labels that are not appropriate.
    I think this problem is responsible for a whole lot of heated discussions around here.

    People don't know the difference between "Duplicate Content" and "Article Syndication", rewriting articles and "spinning", unique and original content.

    We call "opt-in pages" "squeeze pages" now.

    Paul (Myers) recently had to tell people the difference between a forum post and an article.

    Apparently, now people are applying their own definitions to the different "Rights" packages. Hence this thread.

    Speaking of which, Steven, I agree with your definitions laid out and add that there was a time when the licenses would include a pay range to stay within (Please don't sell this product for less than $ or more than $)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3224971].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Andyhenry
    So - where does "unrestricted PLR" come into all this?

    I've seen these also include restrictions on pricing etc...
    Signature

    nothing to see here.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225063].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author drmani
      Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

      So - where does "unrestricted PLR" come into all this?

      I've seen these also include restrictions on pricing etc...
      I suspect that would stand in contrast to forms of 'restricted PLR'
      such as 'rebranding rights' (as we get in PDFs where the name/URL
      can be changed, or affiliate links modified before distributing
      the reports).

      Restrictions would probably qualify under 'special cases' of PLR.

      But I'm not sure pricing restrictions would be possible for PLR,
      especially if the buyer modifies the product enough for it to be
      considered a different one from the original.

      Once again, I'm not suggesting any of this be considered 'expert
      advice', they are more in the line of my personal opinion about
      what the terms mean. Just wanted to clarify that

      All success
      Dr.Mani
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225121].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Andyhenry
        Originally Posted by drmani View Post


        But I'm not sure pricing restrictions would be possible for PLR,
        especially if the buyer modifies the product enough for it to be
        considered a different one from the original.
        Again - I think this is another separate issue - I thought it was illegal to 'set' prices and all that was allowed was 'guidance'.

        But then if it's now your product - surely you can price it at what you want - or nothing.
        ?
        Signature

        nothing to see here.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225167].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author micromike
          Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

          Again - I think this is another separate issue - I thought it was illegal to 'set' prices and all that was allowed was 'guidance'.

          But then if it's now your product - surely you can price it at what you want - or nothing.
          ?
          hmmm..... if I'm still selling this PLR pack, I'd be a tad upset if you started giving it away for free... means I made five bucks, and lost every customer after that.
          Think if you want something to give away, you should ask the writer to create you some content directly, for that purpose. If they write it for you, then you have all the rights anyway.
          Signature

          "Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment".

          "We're the DARK SIDE... and you're SURPRISED we lied about the cookies?"

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225643].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Andyhenry
            Originally Posted by micromike View Post

            hmmm..... if I'm still selling this PLR pack, I'd be a tad upset if you started giving it away for free... means I made five bucks, and lost every customer after that.
            Think if you want something to give away, you should ask the writer to create you some content directly, for that purpose. If they write it for you, then you have all the rights anyway.
            Just to be clear - I'm not giving away anything.... I'm just saying that there needs to be clarity about what can be done - and we all need to understand what is 'legal', 'acceptable', 'expected' for all this.
            Signature

            nothing to see here.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225678].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author micromike
              Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

              Just to be clear - I'm not giving away anything.... I'm just saying that there needs to be clarity about what can be done - and we all need to understand what is 'legal', 'acceptable', 'expected' for all this.
              I totally agree... and, as a passably straight talker myself, I think it's threads like these, with the folks most involved in the business, that foreshadow the internet's thinking to come. We're dealing with it now, the whole world will be trying to deal with it later.
              That's one of the major reason I'm glad I got invited to this forum... it's not that easy to find folks that are doing any thinking at all <sigh>
              thanks for your post; have a great one
              Signature

              "Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment".

              "We're the DARK SIDE... and you're SURPRISED we lied about the cookies?"

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225708].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tim Franklin
      Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

      So - where does "unrestricted PLR" come into all this?

      I've seen these also include restrictions on pricing etc...
      I believe that the term Unrestricted PLR has come into being as a direct opposition to those that produce dubious restricted PLR products, for example I have seen some "PLR" products that had affiliate links embedded in them and there was actually a
      [no] you cannot change the content, (what the heck is that)

      That is another good reason to discuss it, people will eventually vote with their wallets, so a lot of these "fly by the seat of your pants" PLR sellers will slowly disappear, over time. Very interesting thread.
      Signature
      Software Development | Applications | OSX | iOS | Android | Cloud Software Engineering |
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225180].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chri5123
    I think as a standard for selling products/ passing on rights what Steven has put is how I see it:

    RR (resale rights) - Can simply resale the product. Cannot pass on rights
    and cannot modify the product.

    MRR (Master release rights) - Can resale the product but can also pass on
    the rights to others. However, cannot modify contents.

    PLR (Private label rights) - Can resale the product, can pass on rights to
    others and can modify the product.

    However as you can always specify exactly what rights you want to give as the owner if it falls outside the above you just have to put that as well.

    I fear that there will NEVER be everyone agreeing on one "standard" format.

    Chris
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225182].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Andyhenry
      Originally Posted by Chri5123 View Post

      PLR (Private label rights) - Can resale the product, can pass on rights to
      others and can modify the product.
      Then they need to specify that it's not YOUR product even after you change it - if they want to add clauses about where you can/can't sell it and at what price.
      Signature

      nothing to see here.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225213].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Matt Bard
        Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

        Then they need to specify that it's not YOUR product even after you change it - if they want to add clauses about where you can/can't sell it and at what price.
        Andy, I can see a situation where there can be a clause with something that is PLR.

        Let's say that you purchase the PLR product and only change the name as author and leave the rest of the product as is.

        In that case, it's possible that the original author might like to add restrictions.

        Maybe the original author would not want you to give it away because there is the possibility that one of his customers would now get the product they bought from him free from you which could create a conflict.

        There could be restrictions based on how much of the original content was changed to look more like an original work from you.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225594].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Robert Puddy
          Originally Posted by Matt Maiden View Post

          Andy, I can see a situation where there can be a clause with something that is PLR.

          Let's say that you purchase the PLR product and only change the name as author and leave the rest of the product as is.

          In that case, it's possible that the original author might like to add restrictions.

          Maybe the original author would not want you to give it away because there is the possibility that one of his customers would now get the product they bought from him free from you which could create a conflict.

          There could be restrictions based on how much of the original content was changed to look more like an original work from you.
          That would be tough on the creator selling the PLR, he gave up the right to make restrictions when he sold me the rights

          See my post above


          My business model is free on the front end and then upsell

          so as an example if i buy PLR i want to give the product away and upsell the plr rights
          I also may want to give it away as a bonus for one of my existing products.

          I can make more money giving away the product on the front end than 99% of the people trying to hold up the price with false restrictions.

          For me personally dont give a design with PLR either, no one buying plr should use the design that comes with it anyway, it should just get thrown in the bin
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3226274].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author David_Thompson
    Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim View Post

    PLR (Private label rights) - Can resale the product, can pass on rights to
    others and can modify the product.

    If it's that cut and dried, then why do we so often see rights files attached
    with all these "can's and can'ts?"

    For example, I've seen PLR where you can modify the product but the
    original seller says you can't pass on the rights.
    Steven, this whole rights issue is like the wild west, it seems every PLR seller is coming up with their own restrictions everyday.

    PLR is the worst of them all sellers are put all kind of crazy restrictions on them and most don't come with details of what you can or can't do...
    Signature
    JV partnership wanted, Lets grow your list for free. Nothing to do with giveaways. PM Now
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225280].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Bjarne Eldhuset
      Let's say you buy this great video product, which unfortunately is delivered with videos in one of the least widespread video formats.

      Your MRR licence says the following:
      [NO] Can be edited

      What if you convert these videos to another video format, to make sure your customers can actually view them.

      Did you break the licence?

      [YES] or [NO] - what's your opinion?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225369].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Chri5123
        Originally Posted by Bjarne Eldhuset View Post

        Let's say you buy this great video product, which unfortunately is delivered with videos in one of the least widespread video formats.

        Your MRR licence says the following:
        [NO] Can be edited

        What if you convert these videos to another video format, to make sure your customers can actually view them.

        Did you break the licence?

        [YES] or [NO] - what's your opinion?
        I would say [NO] because you are not editing the CONTENT - there is nothing changed apart from the quality and more people will be able to watch them without problems.

        The sound, video and music will stay the same.

        Just my take on it.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225466].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author micromike
          Originally Posted by Chri5123 View Post

          I would say [NO] because you are not editing the CONTENT - there is nothing changed apart from the quality and more people will be able to watch them without problems.

          The sound, video and music will stay the same.

          Just my take on it.
          I'd say "no", since you're not editing or changing the content... it would be different if you were literally changing to a different format, like from text to audio, imho.
          Signature

          "Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment".

          "We're the DARK SIDE... and you're SURPRISED we lied about the cookies?"

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225500].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author micromike
          one more note (as if you haven't heard enough from me already today LOL), during the software lawsuits of the seventies and eighties, the finally-evolved rule was, "if the code is different by more than 50%, it's new"... might be a rough guideline for setting up a yardstick on "mine and yours". As per Tim's post (75 percent different), that would clearly meet the guideline... as long as he didn't say he wouldn't, when he bought it. (At that point, I would get with the original author, and offer a JV deal - if you made their content better, they'd probably be glad to at least super-affiliate with you - win/win).
          Signature

          "Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment".

          "We're the DARK SIDE... and you're SURPRISED we lied about the cookies?"

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225591].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author micromike
      okay, so I'm a newbie... and just starting on the article/ghostwriting thing... but I've already seen posts on other forums, where someone buys one five-pack of PLR, then changes the affiliate liink and the author, and immediately puts it up as their own... and starts selling it.
      There are always a-holes in any business, but I think (as a hopeful writer myself), that legally, I don't have to content myself with the thought, "well, my content was good enough to steal". Any copyscape check would show who had it first (and shame on you, if you didn't get it listed before you put it up), but how would the buyer check it with copyscape, if they hadn't bought it already?
      It's the one percent (again) of takers and thieves that help generate all these "exclusions"... and I'll have a list of them myself, probably. If I write it for you, it's yours... and you won't see it as a PLR pack on my site in a couple of weeks, which would be the flip side of the coin.
      If I sell something as PLR, I expect it to be used to help someone move a product.. that means I shouldn't be surprised to see the affiliate link changed, and a few sentences changed here and there. That, to me, is what you're selling it for... to help folks that don't have the time (or know-how) to write all their articles themselves. What I DON'T want to see, is my work copied, under someone else's byline, with a price tag on it, being sold as "original PLR" - and the excuse used is, "hey, I bought it, it's PLR".
      I may have stepped on some toes here, even of potential customers - and if so, I apologize for being forthright. But the opinion itself? At this stage of the game, that's what I see. And telling the truth is all you can do.
      Signature

      "Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment".

      "We're the DARK SIDE... and you're SURPRISED we lied about the cookies?"

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225469].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SageSound
    While I think it's an interesting question, I think that in practice these are virtually impossible to enforce, particularly RR vs. MRR.

    In fact, I know of several marketers who blatantly disregard licensing restrictions and have done so for years.

    PLR is basically saying, "Feel free to modify this as you like and resell it under your own name and brand". Trying to restrict HOW or WHERE you sell the modified content is fruitless, IMHO. I'd imagine it would be impossible to enforce in court anyway, mainly because if the licensee did a decent job of modifying the original product, it could be quite challenging to convince the court it's a derivative work in the first place.

    The bigger problem, in my mind, is the proliferation of content that started out life as Product A sold as PLR, modified and turned into Product B, resold in various ways including PLR, modified and turned into Product C, and so on.

    Thankfully that's not much of a problem b/c from what I can tell 95% of PLR buyers either never bother to sell the product or, if they do, they don't change it at all.

    -David
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225702].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author micromike
    I think, like a lot of others, this was such a "hot" button for me... that I immediately started typing, and forgot to post a "thanks" to Steven for starting this thread... congrats, Steven!
    Signature

    "Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment".

    "We're the DARK SIDE... and you're SURPRISED we lied about the cookies?"

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225770].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Havenhood
      It might be time to add a new label/classification for products that fall under PLR. I'd like to submit UPLR. (Unlimited Private Label Rights)

      No restrictions. A product that (once purchased) is truly yours.

      Edit: What? No comments on this...
      Signature

      --= -Spazzle- =--

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3225924].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Robert Puddy
    private label rights mean you assigned it to me and you have relinquished all rights to set rules. Once i buy the private label rights its mine not yours

    And i have no problem paying more for those types of rights if thats what i have to do

    But if i cant do whatever i want with it then you have mislead me its not PLR
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3226230].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Brandon Tanner
      Originally Posted by Robert Puddy View Post

      private label rights mean you assigned it to me and you have relinquished all rights to set rules.
      With all due respect Robert, this is simply not true. That's because "private label rights" is basically a meaningless term from a *legal* standpoint.

      I know this because I actually consulted an intellectual property lawyer about this very thing back in 2005, because I wanted to make sure that I understood exactly what "PLR" meant before getting involved in PLR-related business ventures.

      In a court of law, the term "license" means something, but the term "private label rights" really doesn't mean squat.

      The truth is, if the copyright holder (the product's creator) assigns specific usage rights to a product, then you have to respect those rights, regardless of whether they use the term "PLR" or not.

      Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer... I'm just passing on what my $125/hr lawyer told me.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3226739].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Robert Puddy
        Originally Posted by Brandon Tanner View Post

        With all due respect Robert, this is simply not true. That's because "private label rights" is basically a meaningless term from a *legal* standpoint.

        I know this because I actually consulted an intellectual property lawyer about this very thing back in 2005, because I wanted to make sure that I understood exactly what "PLR" meant before getting involved in PLR-related business ventures.

        In a court of law, the term "license" means something, but the term "private label rights" really doesn't mean squat.

        The truth is, if the copyright holder (the product's creator) assigns specific usage rights to a product, then you have to respect those rights, regardless of whether they use the term "PLR" or not.

        Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer... I'm just passing on what my $125/hr lawyer told me.
        I understand that Brandon, but the question was what should it be...

        rights restrictions are put on by vendors mostly to placate people who think if people can give it away it limits their ability to make money from its sale.

        Its a false premise...but unfortunately they have to do this to make sales of the PLR to uneducated people who dont know what they are doing.

        Its the reason why they have to put in the wholly worthless design and mini site element so they can sell it to people who have no clue.

        Robert
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229803].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author DeePower
          Private Label Rights can include:

          [YES] Private use
          Learn from the materials but you can't do anything else with the content.

          [YES] Can be sold
          Sell the content as an ebook and keep the profit. Set up an affiliate program and your affiliates can sell the content as long as you remain in control of it. You have to provide the download link and collect the money and pay your affiliates. Or you can use a program such as Clickbank which collects the money and then pays you and the affiliate.

          [YES] Can be given away as an incentive

          Use the content as a freebie to motivate people to sign up for your list. Or just give it away.

          [YES] Can be packaged with other paid products

          If you have other materials on the same subject that you're selling, combine the content and sell it all together.

          [YES] Can be offered as a bonus with paid product

          Give the content as a bonus when you sell a product.

          [YES] Can Be submitted to article directories (follow their Terms of Service - TOS) If the article directory says the content has to be 100% written by you, or you have to have exclusive rights to the content, you can't submit PLR content. You can rewrite it to fit their TOS.

          [YES] Can be used as web content

          self explanatory

          [YES] Can be used as an e-course/autoresponder sequence
          Set it up as a series for your autoresponder or sell it as an e-course that's set up on an autoresponder.

          [YES] Can be used as blog posts

          Self explanatory

          [YES] Can be broken down into smaller articles

          Break the ebook or report into smaller chunks and use those as articles, web pages or blog posts.

          [YES] Can be combined to create longer articles
          Combine shorter articles into a longer article. Or combine a number of shorter articles into a report or ebook.

          [YES] Can be edited.
          You can change the content however you wish, as much, or as little, as you wish.

          [YES] Can have your name put on them
          Put your name on the material as the author.


          [YES] Can sell Resale Rights
          Selling the rights to resell the content. The person you sell resale rights to can then sell the content without paying you any additional money. But that person can't sell the rights to sell the content to anyone else. Resale rights don't mean you can change the content, add to it, edit it, or put your name on it, unless these other rights are granted as well.

          [YES] Can sell Master Resale Rights

          One step further than resale rights. The person can sell the rights to sell the content to anyone else and they can then resell the content and so forth. MRR doesn't mean you can change the content, add to it, edit it or put your name on it, unless these other rights are granted as well.


          [YES] Can sell Private Label Rights

          Selling the private label rights to the material.


          [YES] Can be added to membership sites
          The material is added to a membership site. There are several different kinds of membership sites. And some writers differentiate the rights based on whether the membership is paid or free. Or whether the content is informational only (personal use) for the members or any rights can be passed on to the members.


          [YES] Can be offered through auction sites
          Can be sold or given away through an auction site.


          Dee
          Signature
          FREE Pump Up Your Profits With PLR
          Are You a Writer? Then you need this FREE guide Convert Your Words to Ca$H Make Money Writing Online
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229861].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Janet Sawyer
    The only real problem with PLR rights - The graphics!!!! Argh!

    OK, I write ebooks as a "ghostie" - nice to see so many of them around on various sites - (quite a buzz - Thanks)

    My packages allow for the sales page + pdf to be sold as is, they also allow the purchasher to ammend or alter or add to the sales page, the open office or word doc file or if they feel the need to delete from the above mentioned files - as the purchasher sees fit. But and this is a big BUT - they do not have rights to offer the graphics provided with the package - why? because you can never be sure where those graphics have come from and indeed what rights you have to pass on to others.

    When you ask someone to make you a mini site - do you tell them what you intend to do with that said mini- site - and do they realise that the graphics they just paid a single licence fee for will be abused by you and your customers, then, when they get a call from Ghetto Images- well, I'll leave it there.

    There is no one single definition of what is - can't be and never will be - each and everyone decides or interprets licence terms and think we are abiding by them.

    Only a Legal ruling can set a precedence as to what resale rights means, or wholesale rights means or private lable rights means and which bit of each is included in the package.

    An analogy of this is in the real world!

    Supermarkets
    They have resell rights to things like Heinz / Batchelors/ Hellmonds / Nestle / Etc products

    They have master resell rights to their own brands that they have contracts to private companies / manufacturers to produce for them with their Supermarket labels on.

    They have PLR rights to think of a product, bring it to the marketplace and then "DICTATE" how others must sell it, they might let others have their own labels on the product, or they might let them only sell at a certain price with their own label on the product - it's down to contracts.

    If you don't get people to agree to terms and conditions clearly spelt out, then how on earth can you expect to have control over your licence terms?

    Probably, all of the above is going to be dismissed as "ramblings" but, what the heck, thought I'd add my thoughts on this anyway.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3227175].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John Delavera
    Steven

    PM me and I'll send you a copy of this guide

    All Rights Explained

    It's all what u need I think.

    John
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3227187].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tim Franklin
    I have seen that guide, and in fact I am sure that I have PLR rights to a guide nearly the same as that one, LOL, sort of ironic, I did read through it, and I think it is about half right, but again it really depends on the legal jurisdiction that the case becomes active in, or what they call the venue.

    This has been a very interesting discussion, one filled with many different opinions.

    One of the most interesting things I have learned over the years dealing with many different legal challenges, is that contract law and intellectual property and publishing rights as a whole are not well defined, more so the newer applications to IP and the internet some may be somewhat better defined over the last three or so years, but still there are a lot of grey areas, there really is no bottom line.

    The one thing I have noticed is that often contracts are drawn up without any regard to actual laws that govern that contract, I have seen contracts that attempted to waive the rights of the lessee even when certain rights cannot be waived by a contract, as in some that state venue is a settled issue when in fact it is not and cannot be decided by contracts. However it is in every boiler plate contract you will find out there simply because it is one point (among many) where the argument begins.

    The thing with opinions is that for every one lawyer you find that has one opinion you can find ten more that have the opposite opinion, which one is right? Is not the job of a good attorney to argue his or her point to the logical conclusion where the law may be applied to the condition that exists at the time of the case.

    Again it depends on the case, the Judge, the law and the venue, among other things. I am not really sure that any one opinion can be the right one, simply because every legal challenge is different.

    Very interesting stuff, (disclaimer, this is not legal advise)
    Signature
    Software Development | Applications | OSX | iOS | Android | Cloud Software Engineering |
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3227266].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
    PLR (Private label rights) - Can modify the product.

    Private label has nothing to do with resale. It's a misconception. This is why some products are labeled "PLR/MRR."

    Furthermore, resale and master resale rights are not unrestricted. There are still other rights which may be denied, such as the right to sell the product under a specific price, or in a specific marketplace.

    RR, MRR, and PLR don't amount to exact definitions of rights. They're convenient shorthand for categories of rights. The details still have to be explicitly called out.
    Signature
    "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229975].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author James Clark
      Steven,

      The last time I was in a room where everyone agreed on one thing was the first day of kindergarten. Well, I don't know about everyone else but I was terrified. By the end of week they were all complaining.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3230016].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author alan9187
        Just a personal oppinion here.

        Most resale rights & mrr products are pritty much in the main understandable what you can and carn't do with them, they just vary between products .

        The problem for me is the PLR issue.

        It's about time people producing and selling PLR products sell them for what they are meant to be "PLR", they should be totaly unrestricted in every aspect, No limitations, thus no confusion. You can change little, nothing or all of the content as you wish.

        I know there would be an issue with graphics, minisites, video etc and the producers of the plr products should gain or produce and give unrestricted rights to the mini sites etc before putting them out as PLR products, or don't provide them in the first place.

        I've been a member of mebership sites that only give plr rights for the members to cirtain products where you have the plr rights to change the graphics, edit the video's and put your name on them, add and subtract any text in the sales page etc, but at the end of all this you can not pass on any rights at all, just sell as your own product, or at most sell RR. To me this not PLR it's a form of MRR.

        For me the term PLR has been expanded and abused and made confused, If more people contacted the vender or producer, or even got a major discusion over this in the forum from input on the producers side then mybe we will get totaly unrestricted PLR products we can do what we like with.
        Signature

        Give everyone a chance

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3337201].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Matt Bard
    Offline, "Private Label" means you can have your label put on a product manufactured by a company that supplies a lot of different companies or "labels", and there are plenty of restrictions.

    For one, I can't tell my customers that Matt's Discount Washing Machine is the same thing as an expensive Maytag Washer.

    Many private label products have restrictions on where they can be sold too.

    Wal-Mart's private label license for a lot of their "generic" t.v.s and other appliances can not be sold at Target stores.

    Most offline companies don't have a problem with license agreements that contain restrictions on use. It's pretty much accepted.

    How many times have you gone to a restaurant where you had a choice between Coke or Pepsi on the same menu?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3230604].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jonluk
      I have absolutely no problem at all with any creator putting restrictions on what I can and can't do with the product I buy from them. However, I believe it is a legal requirement for those restrictions to be made clear at the point of sale - ie not after opening the package.
      If you sell any product as PLR then I think you'd be well advised to ensure you specify what you consider to be the purchasers rights with the product before they buy it - not after.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3230881].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Nick Barton
    I used to deal with private label information products offline.
    The only right that was conferred was the right to edit and
    rebadge the material under the customers own label.

    This was mainly material that was to be used within the customers
    own business eg employee handbooks.

    The private label did not give the rights to resell or anything else.

    This is I believe where the problem lies. Within the IM industry the
    rights are seen as cumulative ie MRR includes RR and PLR includes MRR and RR
    when in fact they are totally different rights all together.

    Private Label Rights only allow the editing and rebranding. Strictly speaking
    they do not even allow the resale of the product, only the use within one's
    own business. So a PLR article could be changed and used to promote your business as an article or as web content.

    If you want to resell it then you need resale or master resale rights. They bear no relation to the PLR.

    If the creator wants to offer transferable PLR with MRR then that is up to them, but lets face it, unrestricted PLR soon becomes valueless.

    If I am buying PLR what I want to see is a restriction on it being resold unless it has
    been substantially changed. I don't want to see it just renamed and sold. I want to see that it is altered and repackaged with added elements to make it a unique product.

    Once it's a unique product then it's up to the vendor what rights he attaches.

    Even Master resell rights should be identified as transferable or not, but the general opinion seems to be that they can be passed on indefinately.

    What cannot be argued is that the explicit rights should be clearly displayed before purchase.

    As to setting a price, in the offline world if a retailer sells a product too low, then the supplier simply stops dealing with them. That's why you can't buy Levis in Tesco.

    In the online world once a product has changed hands that's it. There is no way of stopping the distribution, and as most sales are automated, there isn't a realistic way of stopping the supply of any future products either.

    At least now most products sold with any form of rights do come with a licence which at least is a step in the right direction.
    Signature
    If You Want to learn quickly, watch an expert! Hear It, See It, Do It!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3257983].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author entry
    Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim View Post

    I've been in this business for over 8 years and still can't seem to get 2 people
    to agree on what rights come with RR, MRR and PLR products.

    Basically, this is my understanding from what I've personally learned from
    some of the top guns.

    RR (resale rights) - Can simply resale the product. Cannot pass on rights
    and cannot modify the product.

    MRR (Master release rights) - Can resale the product but can also pass on
    the rights to others. However, cannot modify contents.

    PLR (Private label rights) - Can resale the product, can pass on rights to
    others and can modify the product.

    If it's that cut and dried, then why do we so often see rights files attached
    with all these "can's and can'ts?"

    For example, I've seen PLR where you can modify the product but the
    original seller says you can't pass on the rights.

    To me, that kind of puts it in between RR and PLR.

    And I can keep going with all the restrictions, such as can't sell at auction
    sites, can't add to membership sites, etc.

    So what is your definition of each and can we finally put an end to the
    confusion surrounding rights because quite honestly, after all these years,
    I myself have reached a point where I am not even sure what's what
    anymore, especially when you start getting into all the different exclusions.

    Anyway, let's have a discussion on this and see if we can't come to some
    kind of agreement.
    Is this answer going to be different for everyones answer?

    or do we need a lawyer in the house ?
    Signature
    I Have to say a Massive...THANK YOU to every Warrior who has helped me, and thanks to every warrior who helps me in the future...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3337365].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GuruGazette
    I limit the number of plr licenses sold for most of my stuff and that would be pointless (not to mention deceptive) if all the buyers could turn around and sell plr rights. I also refuse to buy plr with so called "unlimited restrictions" because I consider it useless for my purposes.

    Edit: I some how missed a ton of responses before posting the above. I had no idea people read the rights and terms so differently. In my mind (and terms) it's really simple: plr means you can put your name on them, link them, etc and if desired you can use the content as a base to create your own products.
    Restrictions on plr products only apply to what is delivered to you.

    If you take full advantage of the editing rights and make something completely new, you own full and unrestricted rights to what you created. You are still bound by the original license on the original content *as it was delivered to you* but that has no bearing on the new content/product you made.

    Changing the title and author is not changing the content. Usually you need at least a 50% difference.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3337857].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BMW07
    Hi,

    Newbie here browsing around and found this thread. This is a very informative thread and cleared out a lot of questions regarding PLRs.

    Hope to learn more from you guys.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3552938].message }}
Avatar of Unregistered

Trending Topics