Your right to resell your own stuff is in peril
Under the doctrine, which the Supreme Court has recognized since 1908, you can resell your stuff without worry because the copyright holder only had control over the first sale.
Put simply, though Apple Inc. AAPL -2.13% has the copyright on the iPhone and Mark Owen has it on the book “No Easy Day,” you can still sell your copies to whomever you please whenever you want without retribution.
That’s being challenged now for products that are made abroad, and if the Supreme Court upholds an appellate court ruling, it would mean that the copyright holders of anything you own that has been made in China, Japan or Europe, for example, would have to give you permission to sell it.
“It means that it’s harder for consumers to buy used products and harder for them to sell them,” said Jonathan Band, an adjunct professor at Georgetown University Law Center, who filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries and the Association for Research Libraries. “This has huge consumer impact on all consumer groups.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
It’s not actually my stuff anyway. It belongs to the government (or China).
/
faraway on October 8, 2012 at 11:49 AM
This is just stupid. What difference does it make where an item is made? The 1st seller gets his money when he sells it. After that it’s out of his hands and none of his business. If the publisher didn’t want the books imported back to America then they should not have sold one person 1.2 million worth of books.
Rocks on October 8, 2012 at 11:51 AM
It’s not your stuff it’s a tax.
————- Just-Us Benedict “Kangaroo” Roberts
viking01 on October 8, 2012 at 11:52 AM
Only if you bought it in a foreign nation and brought it to the US.
astonerii on October 8, 2012 at 11:54 AM
Oh and BTW…How could this possibly be copyright infringement when the buyer paid the publisher for every copy? It’s not like he produced his own copies of these books.
Rocks on October 8, 2012 at 11:54 AM
What difference does it make where something is bought? If the guy violated some import law by importing these books then charge him with that. But no copyright was violated here.
Rocks on October 8, 2012 at 11:56 AM
IF a seller in any country puts his product into the stream of commerce such that it can reach America, or if they accept money for an American purchase, then they are consenting to our first sale laws.
tommyboy on October 8, 2012 at 11:57 AM
The law for American purchased items being resellable has been proven in Supreme Court Cases going back hundreds of years already. This case will only DETERMINE your right to sell if it was purchased from a foreign nation.
Honestly, it should not matter where you bought it in my opinion. Then again, I was pretty sure Obamacare’s mandate was unconstitutional…
astonerii on October 8, 2012 at 11:59 AM
And, John Roberts will deem this “constitutional” … if obama tells him to.
Pork-Chop on October 8, 2012 at 12:00 PM
You can thank the music and movie cartels and their cronyist lobby for laying the groundwork for this kind of legislation. And the sheep who mindlessly went along with so-called “anti-piracy” legislation. Of course, nobody is profitting if you are allowing your friend to watch your dvd or listen to your song on their mp3 player. But you’re a “pirate” in the eyes of the law nonetheless. And that’s where NO buying or selling is occuring. Obviously its only a short step to using the same kind of logic to the trading of hard goods. Where money actually DOES trade hands. Nice job, America.
Daikokuco on October 8, 2012 at 12:01 PM
What about a used car or selling your house? Imagine the unintended consequences… you pay a landscaper to spruce up the yard before selling your house. Did you just infringe on the landscaper’s work by making a profit off of his service?
Will this screw up our lives while giving government more control? I give it 50/50 with a Robert’s court.
JellyToast on October 8, 2012 at 12:05 PM
The guy made $1.2M buying Thai market books and reselling them in the US without the publisher’s permission.
p0s3r on October 8, 2012 at 12:05 PM
I’m guessing this will be overturned.
There is no way the Supreme Court could survive not overturning it.
Dusty on October 8, 2012 at 12:06 PM
You say that like it is a bad thing.
JSR08 on October 8, 2012 at 12:10 PM
This is perfectly analogous to the drug re-importation problem, and it exists because companies sell their products for different prices in different countries. If they don’t want it to happen, sell at the same price everywhere.
slickwillie2001 on October 8, 2012 at 12:11 PM
Bah! There’s absolutely no way government can police the sales of billions of personal products.
rickv404 on October 8, 2012 at 12:13 PM
Its obvious that only the UN can settle this.
“UN TO PLACE YARD SALE OBSERVERS THROUGHOUT US; CRACKING DOWN ON COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT”
BobMbx on October 8, 2012 at 12:13 PM
Then it will just be outlawed.
“War on flea markets”
BobMbx on October 8, 2012 at 12:14 PM
Copyright law has been expanding out of control for decades now. It has gone well beyond the purpose envisioned by the Constitution, or the purpose for which it has always existed. And the entertainment industry in the United States has been the biggest driver. Rather than figure out how to effectively profit from new technologies, they’ve simply sought to prevent people from using them.
It’s time for copyright law to be reined in and put on par with patent law. The Constitution specifically says copyrights are to be for a “limited” time period. Let’s return to true limits on the length of copyrights, and let’s not outlaw the way the majority of people would use products on a daily basis. If companies can’t figure out how to adapt to, and profit from, new technologies, then they go out of business. That’s the free market.
Shump on October 8, 2012 at 12:22 PM
War an garage sales!
Scrappy on October 8, 2012 at 12:26 PM
Just-Us Roberts probably would sell his neighbor’s kidney if the thought he could get away with it.
viking01 on October 8, 2012 at 12:32 PM
Well here go our garage sales. How much funding will go toward garage sale enforcement patrols?
ricnrolle on October 8, 2012 at 12:34 PM
As George Carlin might say, it’s not re-selling, it’s just trying to find a place for your stuff.
Christien on October 8, 2012 at 12:39 PM
Just building on yours:
“The flea market at work.”
rogerb on October 8, 2012 at 12:41 PM
First they came for the lemonade stands…..
viking01 on October 8, 2012 at 12:44 PM
The guy made $1.2M buying Thai market books and reselling them in the US without the publisher’s permission.
[p0s3r on October 8, 2012 at 12:05 PM]
Seems to me that unless he bought it below wholesale value at the point of purchase, then the publisher got all it was due, since wholesale has copyright costs baked into it’s price.
If not, then the publisher is discriminating based on race or ethnicity or something.
Seriously, how would you like it if you went to Amazon and had to input your country before you found out how much a product would cost (excluding shipping, handling, taxes) you:
Thailand: $2
Nigeria: $1.25
China: $1.75
US: $20
Dusty on October 8, 2012 at 12:49 PM
Sort of ironic considering all the Intellectual Property theft perpetrated by China.
Lost in Jersey on October 8, 2012 at 12:51 PM
This is handled by import/export laws which we already have. This was not bringing in one book at a time.
Nor would it be hard to enforce. DMV could halt sales until a fee was paid. Transfer of electronics which connect to the internet could be stopped until a fee was paid. Homes clear title could be held up. What they want is to licence items not sell them so as to keep the cash flow going. But it will kill commerce.
BullShooterAsInElk on October 8, 2012 at 12:51 PM
Maybe the useful idiots have handed us yet another useful unintended consequence:
1. By more stuff Made in the USA, then…
2. There’s more demand for Made in the USA, then…
3. There’s more manufacturing brought back on-shore, then…
4. People have jobs and income to buy those products, then…
5. No resell tax!
6. Repeat from step 1.
Tsar of Earth on October 8, 2012 at 12:56 PM
They want you to break the laws, government has no leverage on innocent men.
Nathan_OH on October 8, 2012 at 1:00 PM
One thing left out of the original article:
Books like these often have written on the back covers a restriction: “Not for Sale in the U.S. or Canada” or something similar. I think the company could legitimately argue that first purchase of the book means acceptance of that restriction.
AngusMc on October 8, 2012 at 1:07 PM
It seems to me that this should be fought on an import law rather than a resell law. Being he purchased the books solely for resell which could be an issue even if he purchased the books in the US. Also I believe that private sellers are restricted as to how much and what circumstances they can resell their property already. I can sell my car no problem I cannot sell more than 3 cars a year. I can sell my school books, I might have the state come after me if they find I’ve sold 100 copies of the same book on e-bay.
Gwillie on October 8, 2012 at 1:10 PM
Hmmmm…at this rate, Ayn Rand could very well have been onto something,
The fact that this even “needs” a trial tells you how far our society has fallen.
KMC1 on October 8, 2012 at 1:11 PM
Only if the the first purchase occured outside of the U.S. or Canada.
tommyboy on October 8, 2012 at 1:19 PM
Yeah, RIAA would love to get a ruling like that.
tom on October 8, 2012 at 1:44 PM
Not now, perhaps, but with the possibility of everything having an RFID thingie, the threat of enforcement becomes plausible.
Qzsusy on October 8, 2012 at 1:47 PM
Sorry but overpaying for something “Made in the USA” is not a “good thing” just because it was made in the USA.
If nothing else, you should know enough about the left to know that as soon as we closed our borders to imports they and their corporate buddies would enact policies to completely stifle competition and then we’d really be living in the monopolistic Hell hole they’re always whining about. Not to mention that no other nation buys what you’re selling when you won’t buy what it’s selling.
WeekendAtBernankes on October 8, 2012 at 1:51 PM
Note to Sam’s Clubs nationwide, your customers are next in the capricious lawsuit parade.
Knott Buyinit on October 8, 2012 at 1:58 PM
And?
Capitalist Hog on October 8, 2012 at 2:05 PM
Building materials and textiles from china are NEVER as good as American made products, never.
I take every opportunity to point out my competitors shipping containers from China to my newest customers. I have pictures from local mfgs and vendors on my walls and desk.
I can spot guys like you a mile off. I’d bet that you waste valuable time and money chasing down substandard goods. Suit yourself, schlub.
Capitalist Hog on October 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM
Once the publisher sold the books to the wholesaler they were no longer the publisher’s property.
single stack on October 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM
.
Perhaps if you read the entire article you would have discovered the exact opposite unintended consequences are projected. In the article it is anticapated manufactures would move their operations out of the US since it would give them near unlimited control over their copyrights.
RMOccidental on October 8, 2012 at 2:19 PM
You’re a jackass and I suspect your company is pretty lousy, and I have to wonder what it is you even claim to do. Especially the textiles comment. That’s just retarded. Many of the best textiles in the world come from China (silk, anyone?). There are COUNTLESS examples of shit quality (and usually overpriced, too, since gullible jingoistic tools like yourself will buy it regardless) made in the USA.
And yeah, be proud of being a xenophobic moron who thinks place of origin is determinate of quality, and not actual you know, QUALITY. If I met with you and you were trying to make your case by showing me pictures of your competitors receiving containers from China I would laugh in your face and make sure never to do business with your complacent, entitlement-minded company.
There is a reason virtually ALL cell phones and tvs and laptops and other advanced electronics are made in China. Its because they can actually deliver a quality product at a reasonable price point. Americans just can’t. The US blows at manufacturing sophisticated electronics, and there are a lot of other things fat ‘Merican slobs suck at too. You sound like you are one of them.
Daikokuco on October 8, 2012 at 2:34 PM