First Sale Doctrine

Oct. 18--If you've ever sold an old iPhone or made money off outgrown children's clothes, you're not alone. It's legal, and quite common, because of the first-sale doctrine in copyright law, which gives the copyright holder control of the first sale only.
But there's concern that a Supreme Court case under consideration later this month challenges that doctrine. If the court upholds an appellate court ruling in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons Inc., it could end consumers' ability to sell items made overseas without the original copyright holder's permission. In the case of the iPhone, that means first asking Apple if you can sell your old phone. And the company would probably want a cut from the sale.
What about CNC machinery and tools that come with firmware or software installed?
http://investing.businessweek.com
Best Regards Tom.

wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
I sure wouldn't want to be a SCOTUS member after they've rescinded our right to sell anything we've paid for in the past, should they decide to do so. <shudder>
  Quoted Text Here  
Varian Business Systems overview/featured company? Methinks your link is imprecise. I searched for "resell", "resale", and "supreme court right to resell" to no avail. Bloomberg site won't allow "first-sale" search. Uckfay emthay. OK, googlinit: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/10/scotus-first-sale-2/

  Quoted Text Here  
The link was funky, but I searched a bit farther and found this. http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/10/23/kirtsaeng_v_john_wiley_sons_case_may_upend_international_copyright_law.html
Basically, a guy was importing textbooks from Thailand where they are cheaper and selling them in NY. Publisher cries infringement, guy says first sale.
I think this is a tempest in a teapot though. First sale is not a right of the public, it is a limitation on copyrights. it says than anything lawfully made under US Copyright law may be resold by the buyer. The theory being that the copyright holder gave up his rights at the time of sale.
The blogs are crying that this could mean that anything of foreign manufacture may not have the first sale applied to it.
But another law says that nothing may be imported without the CR holders consent.
The answer seems fairly simple. The infringement was not the selling, the infringement occurred when they were imported.
I am surprised that this has gone this far.
Paul K. Dickman