Supremes Allow Global Book Resale

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

The Supreme Court gave foreign buyers of books, video discs and other copyrighted works a right to resell them in the U.S. without permission of the copyright owner, giving discount retailers a victory and the entertainment industry a setback. The 6-3 decision Tuesday came in the case of Supap Kirtsaeng, a USC graduate student from Thailand who figured he could earn money for his education by buying low-cost textbooks in his native country and reselling them in the United States.

Posted by MUSTANG at 09:31 PM | 27 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

Front Page
Breaking News
Comments
Flagged Comments
User Blogs
Write a Blog Entry
Create a Poll
Edit Account
Weekly Digest
Stats Page
RSS Feed
Back Page

Subscriptions

Read the Retort using RSS.

RSS Feed

Author Info

MUSTANG

Joined 2009/12/29
Visited 2013/05/24

Status: user

Songs you can't get out of your head (34 comments) ...

IRS hid probe until after the 2012 election (8 comments) ...

Chris Matthews Sours on Obama (57 comments) ...

Was it Mr. Holder, in the cloak room, with a warrant? (8 comments) ...

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you have comments about site moderation, contact the site publisher in email.

Kirtsaeng was ordered to turn over his golf clubs, computer and printer as partial payment.

I wonder if he gets his stuff back now.

#1 | Posted by 726 at 2013-03-20 09:46 AM | Reply | Flag:

Good decision, because it keeps the Doctrine of First Sale alive.

Let publishers lobby for a tariff if they need one so badly. Relying on a draconian interpretation copyright law is the wrong approach.

#2 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-03-20 05:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

If & when China or [. . .] takes our intellectual property and
passes it off as their own, the US cannot righteously be indignant.

It's a victory for people who consume but don't produce (0bama types).

#3 | Posted by dean_buvia at 2013-03-20 10:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

American companies choose to the same product for less overseas.

Entrepreneurs purchase those products overseas, import them, and resell them on the domestic market.

So what's the problem? How is this anything other than the free market actually delivering lower prices for consumers?

I guess your complaint is the wrong person is getting rich? But that's only happening because the IP holders created this market when they sold their goods for less overseas.

#4 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-03-20 11:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

South Korea copies every US textbook, reprints it and sells them for $5-10. They refuse to honor copyright law. I presume Thailand and China do the same.

#5 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-03-20 11:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

#5 | Posted by nutcase

What does that have to do with this?

#6 | Posted by et_al at 2013-03-20 11:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

anyone with a real honest intrest in copyright laws like this should look into what SONY and Micor$oft are planning in the near future....

#7 | Posted by GotTruth at 2013-03-21 12:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

What are they planning? Spit it out man!

#8 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2013-03-21 01:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

Whatever it is, it's something so shocking not even ReitzE dare mention it!!!

#9 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-03-21 01:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

If & when China or [. . .] takes our intellectual property and
passes it off as their own, the US cannot righteously be indignant.

If and when? Are you kidding?

Your comment makes me laugh only because I remember a Chinese technician in lab during grad school laughing as he played a ripoff of Coldplay's "Yellow" with a Chinese woman singing Chinese lyrics.

It was a big hit back home according to him.

#10 | Posted by jpw at 2013-03-21 02:08 AM | Reply | Flag:

a ripoff

I think the technical term is "cover." The Cambodians used to cover UK and US rock music all the time back in the 60's before Pol Pot killed them all.

www.youtube.com

Name that tune.

#11 | Posted by ness_gadol at 2013-03-21 06:24 AM | Reply | Flag:

I Will Survive
en.wikipedia.org
check these dancers out!
http://youtu.be/Faf1ch7Q9XE

no? if not, WHAT IS IT?

#12 | Posted by ichiro at 2013-03-21 07:04 AM | Reply | Flag:

wait, i guess not---I SHOULD KNOW THAT MELODY,
Pan Ron's carreer appears effectively over by '78, the release of the song i posted.

so you see, there really is nothing new under the sun!

#13 | Posted by ichiro at 2013-03-21 07:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

it's some 60's county/rock/folk/pop song. d'oh!

like bobby gentry or something. but male, i think.

#14 | Posted by ichiro at 2013-03-21 07:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

"It's a victory for people who consume but don't produce (0bama types)."

Just plain dumb.

#15 | Posted by danni at 2013-03-21 07:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

Nice backbeat.

#16 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-03-21 07:30 AM | Reply | Flag:

It's a cover of a Nancy Sinatra cover of Cher's "Bang, Bang ( My Baby Shot Me Down)."

#17 | Posted by ness_gadol at 2013-03-21 08:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

OH!
youtu.be

i had part of the lyric in my head... my baby ____ ____ down.

ouch... youtu.be

DAMN! so close!

#18 | Posted by ichiro at 2013-03-21 09:02 AM | Reply | Flag:

good ruling!

This supreme court is full of surprises.

#19 | Posted by donnerboy at 2013-03-21 06:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ginsburg, Scalia, and Kennedy in the minority. What are the odds?

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-03-22 04:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

Great!

Let's see it happen for meds.

#21 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2013-03-22 06:37 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Let's see it happen for meds."

Why do I suspect that there will be an exception?

#22 | Posted by danni at 2013-03-22 07:07 AM | Reply | Flag:

What are they planning? Spit it out man!

#8 | Posted by BruceBanner

Whatever it is, it's something so shocking not even ReitzE dare mention it!!!

#9 | Posted by snoofy

Well, Micro$soft and Sony are working to implement new DRM technology that will make it impossible to used your previously purchesed software. No backwards compatablility, On purpose. They HATE the fact the shops like EBgames, and GameStop, Disc Reply exist. PS4s' for instance have this nifty RFID tagger that links a specific RFID code form the machine to the Game Disc you have just purchased. Now this Game Dics is "linked" to your PS4 and ONLY yours. It will NOT function in a friends PS4 should you go over to their house to play with it them. This will dramaticly affect pre-owned sales and in very brief time manage to destroy a "brick and mortar" buisness model that employees multiple thousands across the country and in Europe. They have Been very vague about their inentions with this tech that IS patented and implented in all new SOny PS4s'. SOny Execs are already openly discussing the implementation of this to all Blu-Ray players as well as the Blu-Ray is SONY propriatary tech. So that could mean no more physical rentals, and NO reselling of blu-rays. Its insane! Do you cut a check to FORD, or DODGE everytime you re-sell a car they made, that you bought and drove for a few years and then sold to a family menmber, you dont cut them a check do you? Or what about the contracter that builds a house, does he have a right to a check everytime the home is re-sold? No that would be looked at as INSANE.
I'm only assuming here, but, I figure I MAY be a wee bit younger than yous guys, so this might not seems a BIG deal to you but I as a avid fan of/and make a living partly thru Video Entertainment(Xbox/PS3/PC games) its a concern to me.

#23 | Posted by GotTruth at 2013-03-22 07:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

How is it any different when Amazon.com, Ebay, Half Price Books, or the local used books store down the street resells a book or other form of media? China and other countries ignoring copyright law is a separate issue and should be illegal. But it's a red herring in this case. Supap Kirtsaeng wasn't reprinting the material and selling it, he was buying it legally in his home country and reselling it. Just like the above vendors I mentioned earlier. Good decision, SCOTUS!

#24 | Posted by bartimus at 2013-03-22 12:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

#23 using technology to thwart "First Sale" is nothing new, that's why Region Coding was invented for example. So the DVD you buy for pennies on the dollar in Asia won't work on your DVD player back in the USA.

But I would imagine even the game publishers would have some concerns with the scheme you suggested, where a disc is locked to a particular device. It is not uncommon for people to swap games, etc.

They've tried this sort of thing with car parts, saying using an off-brand part will void the warranty, and the courts have disallowed it. But that's a car, something judges can understand much better than a video game.

But yeah the threat you describe to the used market is a a real one. If you're worried about it support the EFF, that's what I did.

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-03-22 05:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

where a disc is locked to a particular device.

They got that done. You can buy games from the online store...no disc. However, those games are tied to your user name and they limit the number of machines that can have your user name.

#26 | Posted by kanrei at 2013-03-22 05:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

But it wasn't done to stop sharing, but rather to kill the used game market. They make money only once from a game that sells dozens of times and they hate that.

#27 | Posted by kanrei at 2013-03-22 05:14 PM | Reply | Flag: