• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court issues major copyright ruling on foreign sales

Helix

Administrator
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
91,522
Reaction score
89,859
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court, in a major ruling on copyright law, has given foreign buyers of textbooks, movies and other products a right to resell them in the United States without the permission of the copyright owner.
The 6-3 decision is a victory for a former USC student from Thailand, Supap Kirtsaeng, who figured he could earn money by buying textbooks at lower costs in his native country and selling them in the United States.

Supreme Court issues major copyright ruling on foreign sales - latimes.com

good decision.
 
more on this :

Supreme Court backs student in dispute over used textbook sales - Business on NBCNews.com

The millions of Americans who sell used items on eBay and at garage sales, flea markets or church raffles got a big victory Tuesday in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The court ruled that copyrighted items made overseas -- and that includes not only books but also CDs, DVDs, computers, watches and anything else with copyrighted material in it -- are covered by a federal law that says a person who buys such a product is free to turn around and sell it.
 
good decision.

It is a good decision. I agree with the first sale doctrine. Hopefully Supap Kirtsaeng gets reimbursed for legal expenses.
 
good decision.

So any foreign company can now buy one US copyrighted DVD/book, reproduce it endlessly and sell unlimitted copies in the US? That must make US entertainers very happy. I suggest that Obama's books be treated with this "respect". ;)
 
So any foreign company can now buy one US copyrighted DVD/book, reproduce it endlessly and sell unlimitted copies in the US? That must make US entertainers very happy. I suggest that Obama's books be treated with this "respect". ;)

No it means that a foreign person can buy a physical copy of the textbook, come to the U.S., and then sell the physical copy.

Textbook prices in the U.S. are absurdly high because of monopoly exploitation, but other nations won't put up with that bull****. That means there are different prices depending on which country you buy the book. The defendant in this case figured out he could physically buy the books in his country and then sell them in the U.S. as a form of arbitrage. The textbook publishers filed a suit trying to prevent him from selling the books he legally purchased in the U.S because it could collapse their pricing scheme.
 
If someone buys something it is theirs and they have the right to resell that item to whomever they want.

I don't even see how that falls into copyright law...
 
No it means that a foreign person can buy a physical copy of the textbook, come to the U.S., and then sell the physical copy.

Textbook prices in the U.S. are absurdly high because of monopoly exploitation, but other nations won't put up with that bull****. That means there are different prices depending on which country you buy the book. The defendant in this case figured out he could physically buy the books in his country and then sell them in the U.S. as a form of arbitrage. The textbook publishers filed a suit trying to prevent him from selling the books he legally purchased in the U.S because it could collapse their pricing scheme.

You are asserting that the foreign firm has paid all of the required royalties on that text book? If that is the case then, and only then, do I agree with you. It is very difficult to tell if that is the case, as many products made overseas look very similar to what they were copied from.

Does Your US Patent, Trademark, or Copyright Protect You Overseas? | LegalZoom
 
So any foreign company can now buy one US copyrighted DVD/book, reproduce it endlessly and sell unlimitted copies in the US? That must make US entertainers very happy. I suggest that Obama's books be treated with this "respect". ;)

where in the world did this come from?
 
You are asserting that the foreign firm has paid all of the required royalties on that text book? If that is the case then, and only then, do I agree with you. It is very difficult to tell if that is the case, as many products made overseas look very similar to what they were copied from.

Does Your US Patent, Trademark, or Copyright Protect You Overseas? | LegalZoom

Let me explain how this case worked. A kid from Thailand named Kirtsaeng comes to the United States as a student at USC. His family members buy legal textbooks from a local Thai store and then send them to Kirtsaeng by mail. He then re-sells the textbooks on E-bay, netting a healthy profit because of the massive price difference.The publisher John Wiley & Sons Inc, then tried to sue him claiming that he wasn't allowed to resell property he had legitimately purchased. The whole exercise was an attempt to undermine the property rights of individuals.
 
Unless I am missing something here, it seems like this ruling could have an enormous impact on the pharmaceutical industry.
 
Unless I am missing something here, it seems like this ruling could have an enormous impact on the pharmaceutical industry.

Wouldn't the FDA still have oversight of medications? They could declare foreign purchased pharmaceuticals unsafe.
 
Unless I am missing something here, it seems like this ruling could have an enormous impact on the pharmaceutical industry.

Wouldn't the FDA still have oversight of medications? They could declare foreign purchased pharmaceuticals unsafe.

Yes and Yes but a lot of those drugs are actually manufactured in the US and sold overseas at substantially lower prices, ergo it could have an impact. Too much of an impact and those companies will stop selling drugs overseas which may not be so good for anybody---our prices will go up even more and they will not get the drugs.
 
Justices Ginsburg, Scalia and Kennedy dissented. That is not an un-Holy alliance you will see every day.......
 
Yes and Yes but a lot of those drugs are actually manufactured in the US and sold overseas at substantially lower prices, ergo it could have an impact. Too much of an impact and those companies will stop selling drugs overseas which may not be so good for anybody---our prices will go up even more and they will not get the drugs.

If this applies to drugs then man-o-man, talk about a whole new industry. The drug companies know that foreign countries will not stand for their BS, and have told them that if they don't sell cheaper then their whole patent rights are no longer valid and generics will rule. This is why they sell cheaper in foreign countries. If only the US did something similar, and if only the FDA was run by disinterested third party appointees, instead of the actual drug company executives themselves we might actually get real reform on healthcare costs, of which drugs is a big one.


Tim-
 
So any foreign company can now buy one US copyrighted DVD/book, reproduce it endlessly and sell unlimitted [sic] copies in the US? That must make US entertainers very happy. I suggest that Obama's books be treated with this "respect". ;)

No, that's not what this ruling means. A foreign company, buying one copy of a copyrighted product from the U.S., and making endless copies of it would be a violation of the copyright, regardless of what it did with those endless copies; and this ruling does not change that in the least.

What this is about is copyright holders allowing their works to be sold for a different price in one country than in another; and the legality of someone buying a copy in a country where the price is lower, and then bringing that copy into a country where the price is higher, and selling it.

I note that a statement from a trade group that opposed this ruling seems to bring the most clarity about what this ruling is really about…

The Software & Information Industry Association, the principal trade association for the software and digital content industries, said in a statement that it is "strongly disappointed" by the ruling.

"Today’s decision will create a strong disincentive for publishers to market different versions and sell copies at different prices in different regions," the statement said. "The practical result may very well be that consumers and students abroad will see dramatic price increases or entirely lose their access to valuable U.S. resources created specifically for them.

“American publishers will face direct harm, because our markets will be open to a flood of copyrighted material that was intended for purchase overseas. By exploiting pricing models that are meant for students in undeveloped nations, importers both deny those students a full education, and threaten American publishers’ ability to do business abroad.”

Publishers want to be able to charge lower prices in some countries, and higher prices in others, according to what the economic conditions in those various countries best support; and they want this practice to be protected by prohibiting copyrighted materials bought in one country to be sold in another. What this ruling establishes is that no, the publishers are not entitled to this protection, at the expense of the right under the First Sale Doctrine of someone who has legitimately purchased a copyrighted work to sell it when and where he chooses, even if he does so in a place where the publisher is trying to charge a higher price than the publisher charges in the place where the first sale occurred.
 
You are asserting that the foreign firm has paid all of the required royalties on that text book? If that is the case then, and only then, do I agree with you. It is very difficult to tell if that is the case, as many products made overseas look very similar to what they were copied from.

Does Your US Patent, Trademark, or Copyright Protect You Overseas? | LegalZoom

There doesn't appear to be anything in this case that alleges that the books that Mr. Kirtsaeng was buying in Thailand were anything less than legitimate in terms of copyrights and royalties. Nobody seems to be disputing that it was entirely legitimate to buy these books in Thailand, use them in Thailand, and sell them to others in Thailand. The complaint arises entirely out of the fact that these books were being sold for much less in Thailand than in the U.S., and the publishers objected to the impact that Mr. Kirtsaeng's activity could have on their ability to charge different prices for the same product in different countries.
 
If this applies to drugs then man-o-man, talk about a whole new industry. The drug companies know that foreign countries will not stand for their BS, and have told them that if they don't sell cheaper then their whole patent rights are no longer valid and generics will rule. This is why they sell cheaper in foreign countries. If only the US did something similar, and if only the FDA was run by disinterested third party appointees, instead of the actual drug company executives themselves we might actually get real reform on healthcare costs, of which drugs is a big one.


Tim-

Yeah this is going to be a game changer on pharmaceuticals, and could possibly affect the whole global marketplace paradigm. The question remains whether it will be good or bad on balance for Americans.

Personally I think 10 years should be the limit on patents and copyrights. The Congress and Courts apparently have disregarded that "for a limited time" language in the Constitution. This may be a baby step in the right direction though.
 
I think what is missing from this discussion is the obscene prices charged for textbooks at
American Universities. It is almost a captive market.
 
I think what is missing from this discussion is the obscene prices charged for textbooks at
American Universities. It is almost a captive market.
IMO, it is one of the biggest scams... and I choose the word 'scam' purposely... out there.

I'm intrigued at how this could/should affect pharmaceuticals, especially as much of the stuff is manufactured here anyway, but my gut says the FDA will somehow carve out an exemption based on some bogus fear factor.
 
I think what is missing from this discussion is the obscene prices charged for textbooks at
American Universities. It is almost a captive market.

it's utterly ridiculous. I paid tons for my books, and they only offered me a pittance for resale, so I just kept mine for a reference library.

someday, it all moves to ebooks, and then keeping those high prices becomes a major challenge for the book companies.
 
it's utterly ridiculous. I paid tons for my books, and they only offered me a pittance for resale, so I just kept mine for a reference library.

someday, it all moves to ebooks, and then keeping those high prices becomes a major challenge for the book companies.

I kept my books too... I bought them used, but I would rather keep them than recycle them.

Honestly I don't know why I had to pay 90 bucks for a book and then turn around and pay 10 bucks for a similar book with the same pages, design, weight etc... I suppose if it's in demand then you must pay demand prices... It's like educators dictate supply and demand on books given their lessons...

College is so useless...... I'll bet 90% of those who went to college don't know **** about the Bolsheviks or the revolution, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc.

I learned more outside of my degree than I did while trying to prove myself.
 
Last edited:
I kept my books too... I bought them used, but I would rather keep them than recycle them.

Honestly I don't know why I had to pay 90 bucks for a book and then turn around and pay 10 bucks for a similar book with the same pages, design, weight etc... I suppose if it's in demand then you must pay demand prices... It's like educators dictate supply and demand on books given their lessons...

when you're required to purchase something specific for school and there's only one choice, they can pretty much charge whatever they want.
 
when you're required to purchase something specific for school and there's only one choice, they can pretty much charge whatever they want.

I know - been there and done that...

I kept my books tho...
 
Back
Top Bottom