What If You Couldn't Sell What You Own?

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by pspr, Oct 7, 2012.

  1. pspr


    An appellate court has said just that about any item made overseas - from your car to your clock radio. To uphold this ruling would be absurd. SCOTUS will hear arguments about this decision and will either uphold the ruling or set things right.

    At issue in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons is the first-sale doctrine in copyright law, which allows you to buy and then sell things like electronics, books, artwork and furniture, as well as CDs and DVDs, without getting permission from the copyright holder of those products.

    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. 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.”

    Another likely result is that it would hit you financially because the copyright holder would now want a piece of that sale......

    The case stems from Supap Kirtsaeng’s college experience. A native of Thailand, Kirtsaeng came to America in 1997 to study at Cornell University. When he discovered that his textbooks, produced by Wiley, were substantially cheaper to buy in Thailand than they were in Ithaca, N.Y., he rallied his Thai relatives to buy the books and ship them to him in the United States.

    He then sold them on eBay, making upward of $1.2 million, according to court documents.

    Wiley, which admitted that it charged less for books sold abroad than it did in the United States, sued him for copyright infringement. Kirtsaeng countered with the first-sale doctrine.

    In August 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld a lower court’s ruling that anything that was manufactured overseas is not subject to the first-sale principle. Only American-made products or “copies manufactured domestically” were.

    “That’s a non-free-market capitalistic idea for something that’s pretty fundamental to our modern economy,” Ammori commented.

    The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on the case on Oct. 29.

    Both Ammori and Band worry that a decision in favor of the lower court would lead to some strange, even absurd consequences. For example, it could become an incentive for manufacturers to have everything produced overseas because they would be able to control every resale.

  2. Then the value of new stuff drops :eek:
  3. pspr


    Who would buy an imported product that isn't disposable if SCOTUS upholds this ruling?
  4. 377OHMS


    I would simply ignore whatever the government says and do what I please.
  5. I agree, this concept is stupid. Imagine how many parts in our cars and computers are made overseas. Can't resell them? Nonsense.