Link = Your right to resell your own stuff is in peril
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.
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.
> Link = Your right to resell your own stuff is in peril
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
Good luck enforcing that.
Publisher John Wiley sells textbooks overseas for less money that the same books here in the US. Some enterprising young student had his relatives in Thailand buy up all the texbooks, and he began a re-selling business, which netted him about $1.5 million, theoretically undercutting Wiley's profits.
(Of course if Wiley standardized their prices around the world, this would probably not be an issue....)
Hopefully the Court will find some way to make a distinction between re-selling large numbers of goods for profit, and re-selling small amounts of used goods at a lower price than purchased.
Imagine if re-selling your HP48 required getting permission from (or paying a fee to)
an assembly plant in Singapore.
> Publisher John Wiley sells textbooks overseas for less money that the same books here in the US. Some enterprising young student had his relatives in Thailand buy up all the texbooks, and he began a re-selling business, which netted him about $1.5 million, theoretically undercutting Wiley's profits.
>
>
> (Of course if Wiley standardized their prices around the world, this would probably not be an issue....)
>
>
> Hopefully the Court will find some way to make a distinction between re-selling large numbers of goods for profit, and re-selling small amounts of used goods at a lower price than purchased.
>
>
> Imagine if re-selling your HP48 required getting permission from (or paying a fee to)
> an assembly plant in Singapore.
Why should any court be involved in stopping what is basically arbitrage?
> Why should any court be involved in stopping what is basically arbitrage?
Because unlike arbitrage in items like commodities and financial instruments, the international trade in intellectual property is regulated by treaty (The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS))