Yeah, their reading of that statute is absurd, but the reason they argued this way is because they really want to be able to clamp down on individuals reselling

Yeah, their reading of that statute is absurd, but the reason they argued this way is because they really want to be able to clamp down on individuals reselling their own goods. This follows previous attempts to expand the control copyright holders can exert, like Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc. Hopefully this gets shut down, or we'll start seeing paperback books with EULAs printed on the first page, taking us all the way back to Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus.