Forum - View topicNEWS: Pubs to U.S. Supreme Court: No 1st-Sale Doctrine on Imports
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
hissatsu01
 Posts: 963 Location: NYC |
|
|||||
|
Assuming it was decided that the first sale doctrine doesn't apply to copyrighted works, wouldn't it only affect US companies importing foreign goods into the US? In which case it wouldn't affect me at all since any imports I buy, I buy from companies outside the US. But like I said, I doubt this will happen. The AAP is only filed an amicus brief because they want to protect the highly lucrative textbook market from the perceived threat of imported textbooks*, but I think there are far bigger threats to that immensely bloated beast.
*I wasn't aware you could pick and choose textbooks. When I was in college you had to stick to the textbooks assigned. If only I had known I could have saved a bundle by buying the Latvian version of Sociology 101 instead. ;p |
||||||
|
||||||
Draneor
 Posts: 355 |
|
|||||
While I am not a lawyer, I believe there is the potential that it could affect the resale of a purchase for non-commercial use as well. For example, if I were to buy the Full Metal Alchemist OST from CDJapan, if I were to then attempt to resell it on eBay, FUNimation could block it as they have the exclusive license in North America to all things FMA. On the other hand, the doctrine of first sale should still apply if I resold a FMA CD I bought from FUNimation. But I suppose it comes down to how narrow the Supreme Court crafts its opinion (assuming it is against Costco). As someone who also imports a lot, the case certainly is a bit worrisome. Many of the goods sold in the dealer's rooms of anime conventions are grey market too. Granted, such action may not be worth FUNimation's time (although they did send a C&D to Akadot for reselling imported FMA CDs). See this article for more detail about the case. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
hissatsu01
Posts: 963 Location: NYC |
|
|||||
|
Return on imports on eBay is so poor that I'm far better off shipping it back to Japan, having someone auction it off for me, and giving them a cut. I still get several times what I would on eBay.
Anyhow, though it wouldn't affect me, I think it would be rather unfortunate were this to come to pass. |
||||||
|
||||||
mglittlerobin
 Posts: 1071 |
|
|||||
|
This would be impossible to enforce though, with the internet and so many places to sell online, they couldn't possibly enforce this. How would they be able to?
|
||||||
|
||||||
RedTail
 Posts: 176 |
|
|||||
|
Seeing as how this has the potential to indirectly disrupt the free trade of goods, I can see a right-leaning court like the SCOTUS ruling in favor of Costco and upholding the doctrine. That'd be my guess.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
RedTail
Posts: 176 |
|
|||||
Although I can't remember the name of the of it, there exists a legal principle which allows individuals to resell their property without any legal ramifications. This would only affect businesses which deal in imports And no, it really wouldn't be difficult to enforce. A US-based business would be an easy and more wortwhile target for a lawsuit than any individual just selling off his personal crap. |
||||||
|
||||||
Tempest
 I Run this place.ANN Publisher  Posts: 10420 Location: Do not message me for support. |
|
|||||
Same way they enforce piracy. They'd pretty much only go after large commercial importers. Funimation sent a C&D to Akadot a few years ago when Akadot imported a Fullmetal Alchemist OST that Funimation had released as an exclusive item in the FMA tin boxes. Most anime companies however focus on availability when doing this. I spoken to people Funimation regarding this, and they don't go after smaller companies (retailers) that import merchandise that isn't otherwise available in North America. Personally I do not believe in grey market restrictions. I think it should be perfectly legal to sell something in the USA if it was legally purchased in another country*. I understand why licensees feel differently, but I feel they should be forced to compete with essentially legitimate imports* on the open market. If they want people to buy the domestic licensed goods, they have to make certain that licensed goods are available and no less attractive to buy compared to legitimate imports*. *When I refer to legitimate imports and items legally purchased elsewhere, I am of course referring exclusively to items that have been produced with the master licenser's approval or the approval of a proxy/licensee. I am not talking about unlicensed merchandise that is legal in its country of origin due to weak or non-existent copyright laws (ex: former Son May CDs). |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Tempest
I Run this place. ANN Publisher Posts: 10420 Location: Do not message me for support. |
|
|||||
It's not a matter of upholding the doctrine. The doctrine isn't being challenged. What's being questioned is whether or not it applies in this scenario. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Tempest
I Run this place. ANN Publisher Posts: 10420 Location: Do not message me for support. |
|
|||||
Right of First Sale is, I believe, what you are referring to, and it is exactly what is being discussed here. |
||||||
|
||||||
Kougeru
 Posts: 5527 |
|
|||||
|
i'm so confused right now. can anyone explain this in really simple terms
|
||||||
|
||||||
spartydragon
 Posts: 61 Location: Portland, OR |
|
|||||
|
Okay, am I understanding this right? If I were to buy a DVD from Japan, and then, say at some point, decide to sell this DVD on ebay, it would technically be illegal? O.o
Wouldn't that make every used book, CD and movie store illegal? I mean, the publisher already got their money, who cares what happens to it afterwords right? Or is this falling into the realm of secondhand games being worse than piracy, as some in the industry have claimed? *scratches head* |
||||||
|
||||||
|
bayoab
Posts: 831 |
|
|||||
Omega is suing Costco for selling watches that are bought from outside the US because they have the copyrighted globe imprinted on them. Costco claims they are legally allowed and Omega can't stop them. For that case, AAP filed what is known as an amicus brief which is basically a document saying to the Supreme Court "Here is why we believe you should rule in favor of Omega." Really, this is nothing uncommon. Outside parties file these all the time in cases which could have greater consequences.
The question is if a copyright owner exists in the US. If no copyright owner exists, there is nobody to object. It really isn't a "legality" issue, but "Can the copyright owner prevent it" issue. (IANAL)
First sale doctrine applies to anything* that is copyrighted in the US. Once you as a consumer have bought something*, you are legally allowed to sell it to whomever and the copyright owner can't stop you. The party you sell it to may then resell it as well. (IANAL) *It isn't actually anything. There are one use licenses and other exemptions out there. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Draneor
Posts: 355 |
|
|||||
Also not a lawyer, but many products include specific end user license restriction (such as "for use in Japan only" and "not for resale or rent"). For products sold in the US, the exhaustion doctrine can sometimes rend these restrictions as void after the first sale (c.f. Jazz Photo Corp. v. United States International Trade Commission). While restrictions on say renting for US DVDs are invalid according to the first sale doctrine, I don't know if the same consumer protections apply to foreign goods. This is partly why this case interests me. Granted, this is academic as it would be difficult to enforce. |
||||||
|
||||||
enurtsol
 Posts: 14758 |
|
|||||
In a publishing example: say there's an UK English version of a manga released by a UK company and an US English version of the same manga by a US company. An US retail store cannot just purchase, import, and sell the UK version without permission from the US licensee since the US company has exclusive rights for English versions in the US. (Though in actuality, companies don't go after such retailers unless they import and sell tons and tons of it.) Just because the retailer purchased it doesn't mean he can simply do whatever he wants, import it then sell it without the permission of his local rights-holder. That's what it means that the First-Sale Doctrine doesn't apply to imports. |
||||||
|
||||||
Sunday Silence
 Posts: 2047 |
|
|||||
Not to mention eBay would pretty much ignore it, given the vast number of bootleg items, junk (as in inferior goods), and fakes being sold on it everyday. Heck, you can buy Fake Coins from Chinese sellers, which if i'm not mistaken, is a serious crime under many governmental laws. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group