Hardcopy books would fall under the implied license doctrine.
It's clear from the conduct of the parties to the transaction that a limited license for reading is intended, and the parties just never bothered to make an explicit license to memorialize that agreement.
> Hardcopy books would fall under the implied license doctrine.
One might be able to craft a colorable argument that an implied license to some right that is exclusive under copyright is created in the usual sale of a hardcopy book -- but you certainly haven't yet done so.
> It's clear from the conduct of the parties to the transaction that a limited license for reading is intended,
"Reading" isn't -- in the US, at any rate -- an exclusive right under copyright [0], so no license is necessary.
It's clear from the conduct of the parties to the transaction that a limited license for reading is intended, and the parties just never bothered to make an explicit license to memorialize that agreement.