3 ms·
10 years ago, https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/articles/u-s-supreme-court-holds-that-books-printed-and-sold-abroad-may.html https://www.finnegan.com/en/insi
by walterbell 2y ago
10 years ago, https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/articles/u-s-supreme-court-holds-that-books-printed-and-sold-abroad-may.html https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/articles/u-s-supreme-co...
> U.S. Supreme Court Holds that Books Printed and Sold Abroad May Be Freely Resold in the U.S. Because the Copyrights Are Exhausted Under the First-Sale Doctrine.. The Kirtsaeng decision is significant to copyright owners, and it may also have important ramifications for patent owners who make and sell goods abroad that practice a U.S. patent.
https://www.iveticlaw.com/owning-vs-controlling-understanding-the-first-sale-doctrine-in-copyright-law https://www.iveticlaw.com/owning-vs-controlling-understandin...
> The first sale doctrine is a legal principle that limits the copyright owner's control over a particular copy of their work after it's been lawfully sold. This doctrine, in essence, acts to cut off the copyright owner's rights in the created work after the product is first sold (ie. when the copyright owner releases their work into the marketplace). Another way to describe it is that the copyright holder's right to control the distribution of their work goes away after the “first sale” of the work,(hence the name). In more straightforward and more practical terms, once you buy a book, CD, DVD, artwork or any other authorized copy of a copyrighted work, the copyright owner generally loses the right to control what you do with that specific copy. You can resell it, lend it, give it away, or even destroy it, without their permission.
Remote bricking requires software, which is sold under copyright law.
- anon84873628 2y agoAnd yet some software licenses do dictate what the user can/must do with regards to further modifying or distributing the code. This also has nothing to do with exclusivity agreements arranged between companies, as seems to be the case here.
- walterbell 2y ago> nothing to do with exclusivity agreements arranged between companies The 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case depended on a plaintiff that was making enough money on textbook arbitrage to fund a legal case all the way to the Supreme Court. It provided new clarity on book distribution and geographical "exclusivity". If software enforcement of device distribution agreements affects a large enough flow of capital, then corner cases will accrue enough economic impact to be tested in courts. Manufacturers do not have carte blanche to manipulate hardware remotely, e.g. they cannot take actions that could injure humans. Where are the limits? For now, we have many opinions and few laws.