This would have been an ENORMOUS clusterfuck if SCOTUS had upheld this — especially for eBay:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that textbooks and other goods made and sold abroad can be re-sold online and in discount stores without violating U.S. copyright law. The outcome was a huge relief to eBay, Costco and other businesses that trade in products made outside the U.S.
In a 6-3 opinion, the court threw out a copyright infringement award to publisher John Wiley & Sons against Thai graduate student Supap Kirtsaeng, who used eBay to resell copies of the publisher’s copyrighted books that his relatives first bought abroad at cut-rate prices.
Justice Stephen Breyer said in his opinion for the court that once goods are sold lawfully, whether in the U.S. or elsewhere, publishers and manufacturers lose the protection of U.S. copyright law.
Except, of course, software. Which has magical powers that allow it to be bought, yet not bought!
“We hold that the ‘first sale’ doctrine applies to copies of a copyrighted work lawfully made abroad,” Breyer said.
Had the court come out the other way, it would have crimped the sale of many goods sold online and in discount stores, and it would have complicated the tasks of museums and libraries that contain works produced outside the United States, Breyer said. Retailers told the court that more than $2.3 trillion worth of foreign goods were imported in 2011, and that many of these goods were bought after they were first sold abroad, he said.
AGAIN—cannot read. i’ve reached my limit.
What is this language you speak?
Would this be applicable to medications as well? Hmm.
Copyright vs. patents?
Not so much copyright vs. patent, but real vs. intellectual property. Nothing is so sacred in American law than rights in property ownership. If you don’t own something after you’ve bought and paid for it, do you really own anything? The software and music industries must pay a pretty penny in brib . . . campaign contributions to supersede ownership.