This shit can't be real. LOL
How a Supreme Court ruling may stop you from reselling just about anything | Ars Technica
How a Supreme Court ruling may stop you from reselling just about anything | Ars Technica
How a Supreme Court ruling may stop you from reselling just about anything
- Thread starter Wicked Ice
- Start date
Sure it can.
If you let politicians make enough laws (statutes), and the federal register to get as large as it has, you're bound to end up with situations where everyday behaviors are criminalized, or where everyone becomes a criminal regardless of what they do.
If you let politicians make enough laws (statutes), and the federal register to get as large as it has, you're bound to end up with situations where everyday behaviors are criminalized, or where everyone becomes a criminal regardless of what they do.
Short summary:
The defendant imported books from Thailand where the sale price is much lower than the US, and sold them in the US below the RRP. Now he is being sued for it.
I have faced a similar issue where the US manufacturer of a certain product line I sell has set the RRP in Australia at $15, and $5 in the USA. My wholesale price from the sole Australian distributor is $9, the wholesale price in the USA is likely $2-3. It's therefore cheaper for me to order the items from the USA at the retail price and sell them here in Australia rather than go through the official distributor at a wholesale price. It's fucking ridiculous.
The ruling would not affect me because the physical items I sell can't be copyrighted like a book. So medium story short, it won't stop you from reselling just about anything as the linkbait sensationalist title wants you to believe, it may stop you reselling copyrighted grey imports on a mass scale, a rather narrow spectrum of products including books, movies etc.
It's certainly not EVERYDAY BEHAVIOR BEING CRIMINALISED!
The defendant imported books from Thailand where the sale price is much lower than the US, and sold them in the US below the RRP. Now he is being sued for it.
I have faced a similar issue where the US manufacturer of a certain product line I sell has set the RRP in Australia at $15, and $5 in the USA. My wholesale price from the sole Australian distributor is $9, the wholesale price in the USA is likely $2-3. It's therefore cheaper for me to order the items from the USA at the retail price and sell them here in Australia rather than go through the official distributor at a wholesale price. It's fucking ridiculous.
The ruling would not affect me because the physical items I sell can't be copyrighted like a book. So medium story short, it won't stop you from reselling just about anything as the linkbait sensationalist title wants you to believe, it may stop you reselling copyrighted grey imports on a mass scale, a rather narrow spectrum of products including books, movies etc.
It's certainly not EVERYDAY BEHAVIOR BEING CRIMINALISED!
Governing bodies exists whose sole purpose is to create laws. It's simply a matter of time.
How long until copyright is switched with patent?
Patent? Trademark?
The state has you covered bro.
The only reason they are grey is because someone made them illegal.
We were speaking in terms of theory. That said, are you even aware how large the US federal register is?
Not quite, if I remember correctly, he bought them in England, shipped them out to (the Channel Islands? bit hazy on that) so that he could claim back the tax, then shipped them back in again. He eventually started saying that he'd shipped them to the Channel Isles without them actually leaving England.
That's their sole purpose? I wish they would expand into expert shoe repair and do that at the same time.
Multiple supreme court rulings in favour of the importer disagree with you bro. Even in cases of copyrighted products, the case either fell apart or was ruled in favour of the grey importer.
L'anza v. Quality King (copyrighted hair products, fell under copyright law because of the creative artwork and design) and Costco v. Omega Watches (in the article if you read it).
Huh? There's nothing illegal about grey imports. Get your facts straight, and read the article first.
This won't happen.
Law as practiced by the government is arbitrary and ad hoc.
They could have just as easily decided the other way, and one day may when it suits their agenda.
The notion that statute law is some objective truth is silly and naive.
Also, we're talking about the American legal system here. What little good there is in the Australian legal system is because it is based more closely on British Common Law (private law) than the American law is. It's irrelevant though, because the only people who give a shit about Australia are Australians. Everyone in the world has to be worried about what the US Government does.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ihPOTDxMfE]10 crack commandments biggie smalls - YouTube[/ame]
So let me get this straight - they're allowed to outsource the manufacturing of these items to third world countries, and save on costs whilst reducing the benefits of creating jobs in their home country.
However, when one of their customers does basically the same thing, sourcing abroad, selling in the US... they sue?
This is why publishing companies will die, and not soon enough.
However, when one of their customers does basically the same thing, sourcing abroad, selling in the US... they sue?
This is why publishing companies will die, and not soon enough.
That's not true. At all. The lower courts ruling even noted the implications and damage to the first sale doctrine, suggesting congress would likely need to step in at some point.
The only reason it would affect you is because you are AUSTRALIAN, this is US stupidity. It will, however, end up over there too eventually.