Copyright & patent laws do encourage creative geniuses to reinvent America...but the sames laws are sometimes unfair - and can hinder new tech when the older patents and copyrights get in the way and get undeserved wealth (socialism and government giveaways for the rich).

The problem really is first, in the way companies try to control prices in different markets and second, the product being allowed to be exported/imported (not saying that it should be limited, but that would be the appropriate point to address the issue, not limiting the rights of a legal US owner from marketing what they legally acquired and own)

I hope the Supreme Court actually knows what it's doing and just wants to clearly and finally put it to bed to end to the nuisances in the lower courts. Looks like the Second U.S. Court of Appeals in New York screwed up here.

It's hard to imagine the loss of freedom to resell something you legally own and for marketing it for what it is, trademark and all. That's not trademark abuse.

Trademark laws are intended to protect the mark's owner from dilution and deception, not to limit the rights of an owner of property from truthful disclosure. I have to believe the Supreme Court is smarter than that.

Does this precedent??? allow GM to go after Used Car Salesmen??? could it basically outlaw the resale of any product by anyone, without the expressed permission of the Original Manufacturer???

Because of the first-sale clause anti-trust. You can slap a sticker on anything and that doesn't make a law that supports it. Even if its a law in Thailand that doesn't make it so here in America.

Ownership? What's that? When you "buy" something, you're simply signing a licensing agreement to use it for a time, at the discretion of the manufacturer. Now get back to work, fellow sharecroppers!

(So you know, that's exactly what you agree to when you hit "I Agree" on all those online contracts you never read. iTunes, Amazon, anything that you buy that doesn't physically get mailed to your door, you don't actually own. And yes, the Supreme Court affirmed that decision back in 2010. Now they're going after physical property.)

@anti-trust

He doesn't, and what he did and how he did it was clearly illegal ... but the question that is larger than this particular case is...Does a manufacturer have the "legal authority" to say what can and or cannot be done with a product once you have purchased it... Can Apple legally forbid me from selling my Ipad??

The publishers are just upset because they see a threat to price gouging students in the US. The politics behind how a University selects a book get really dirty. If you are in a purchaser role for text books, you are in a very powerful position. Anybody who has been to college knows it is a racquet.

Maybe it should be illegal for a public university to ask test or quiz questions that are based on a specific text book.

This is a bull@!$%# law. If I decide to have a yardsale, I will have a yardsale....

Many people will loose their jobs, companies will go under. Is this the job of our government to pick and choose which companies can stay in business?

I purchase all of my text books from overseas. $60.00 vs. $210.00 is a no brainer to me.

This is going to have interesting repercussions in the Movie and Software industries as well.

Many many companies do things like early-release and far lower prices compared to stateside and in terms of the video game industry, developers are trying to kill the secondary market for games because they feel it gets in the way of controlling their prices at retail...even though they're not supposed to price-fix, they've basically developed a work-around with 1-time use product codes and unfinished games that are only complete when one buys the DLC (which is non-transferable).

If a publisher prints something specifically for a foreign market and marks it NOT FOR EXPORT, why does that not protect them from someone doing just what this guy has done? Can't the publisher also go after their distributor/reseller in Thailand for not enforcing that? That is the problem with American discount businesses. They look for all of the loopholes to sell cheap products for the cheap consumers of this country who then complain that they need higher wages. It is, and always has been, the chicken/egg circle of wages/cost of goods sold. If it is made or published here in the US, then it should NOT be allowed to be exported, then re-imported for sale in this country, especially if, like in this case, it has been clearly marked in the original printing (not some sticker added later) that it is NOT FOR EXPORT.

In this guy's case, I'm sure his family didn't go into a store and buy just one or two books at a time and ship to him. They must have bought several pallets of them (maybe even directly from the distributor)? Maybe we need to have customs fees that tax these NOT FOR EXPORT products at a rate that then makes that product equal to the lowest price the publisher offers the books for in the US.

jan-1678944

Something very strange is going on with the MSNBC site, whats up with this ?

Hope they arn't destroying one of the best sites on the web ?

IF by strange you mean moving closer to the middle of the political spectrum in their reporting then yes.

That does not ruin a site, it makes it more truthful and less bias. Something that this site has lacked for a very very long time.

@anti-trust

If this Kid set up his business the way I would have...I would have taken the orders stateside, had my Buyers(family?) in Thailand or China or Vietnam fill those orders, and ship directly to the purchaser...likely the sellers had a person walk into their store and purchase what a local college student might be expected to buy...it would also be the best way to by-pass both countries import/export laws, tarriffs, and business expenses and incorme taxes...Just sayin

jan -

I noticed that this morning also. I couldn't just get to newsvine through the articles on the main page. I had to go a round-about route.

Jeremy -

I noticed that they are trying to appear to be more center-of-the-road, although when you read the articles, they are still leaning seriously to the left. They are still trying to steer away from Benghazi and claiming that the electoral map favors Obama still. Other sites are starting to show Romney ahead.

It sounds like what the publisher is really arguing for is the right to shaft the American consumer.

Mr Phea: Yes, GM can control the sales of its cars. They put me out of business by threatening to pull the franchise license of any dealer who sold a vehicle that was eventually exported. If no dealer would sell to you, and your customers wanted NEW (under 100 mile cars) there wasn't much that could be done on my part. Interesting that the prices were different for the same car in different parts of the world.

Same with drug companies, they lower the prices in Canada and collect their lost money by raising the prices here. I am a firm believer in the free market. If I can buy your product and ship it somewhere faster than you can, then I should be able to do it.

The whole college textbook scam IS a racket. Half the time the instructor wants you to buy the very same book he/she wrote.

@ Eliazabeth

Smart thinking girl. We need more like her. The country needs thinking people.

Keep on it girl!!!!

WOW, we have sooo few serious problems in this country, the Supreme Court can spend its time regulating . . . flea markets.

<sigh>

No problem the book cost $210 new, put it on ebay the book has no cost but shipping and handling

is $60!!! See the book is free the shipping & handling is $60. Now you can stick your copy right Law

up your A$$.

Bet drug companies hope the resale of cheap Canadian drugs back into the US is squashed too.

Sounds like The family was pretty much engaging in import/export Black market sales....So why should that affect me selling a used Yamaha outboard motor,or last month's Apple-pick-a-number phone at a yard sale???....While stationed in Germany,we were told that sending home German coffee,or Cuban cigars was considered black market enterprise,and would get us a seat on the plane home to jail......so we had to drink all our coffee before we left,and smoke all the cigars.....tough night...........Go Regulate something more important........better yet,drop some of the stupid regulations that hurt people who work for a living,and try to LEGALLY make a little gas money on the side selling old,used crap out of our garages................................U.S. Army Disabled Veteran

Globalization or Protectionism. Sounds like someone is trying to have it both ways.

This guy knowingly made committing fraud into a business. This is very different from selling a few of your old texbooks. Ditto for ebay. Selling your old stuff or dumpster diving for saleable items is not the same as purposefully circumventing trade and copyright laws by importing goods illegally. I don't think any business has an interest in going after garage sales, but they have every right to go after someone committing blatant fraud.

But another law prohibits importing works "acquired outside the United States ... without the authority of the owner of copyright."

And it is easy to argue that by accepting money for sale of the copy, the owner of the copyright has authorized the buyer to do whatever they want with their copy - that is what the First Sale doctrine says.

The publisher may well mark one copy of a book as "Not to be opened on Wednesday and Thursdays" and another copy "Not to opened on Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Friday nor Saturday."Then you would be obligated to buy both if you want to use it throughout the week.

The two laws are not in contradiction. When the publisher sells a copy, that is the end of all obligations between buyer and seller with regards to that particular copy.

No. These are Grey Market Sales. Not Black Market. Every manufacturer of anything knows - raise the price in one market, grey markets will crop up. They are not illegal. Stamping "illegal" on the book doesn't make it illegal either. Electronics markets have fought this for years - unsuccessfully. The question of taxation is where this becomes complicated. Maine drinkers have bought their booze in tax free New Hampshire for ever. The Maine St Police sometimes pulls people over - not because its illegal, but to access taxes on them. If tax entities or manufactureres want to extract more from one set of people than another, they have to expect people will try to get around it. Using government to facilitate your transfer pricing model is unamerican

What this is really about is the publishers trying to protect their right to charge different prices in different markets based on what they think they can get. They do not want to have to adjust their prices so that the same product costs the same amount, allowing for shipping costs, no matter where it is sold. They want to be able to price gouge in certain markets where they know they can get away with it. I hope that the Supreme Court goes with the doctrine of first sale on this where the copyright owner loses all say about what is done with the book or other item once it is sold to the first buyer. The manufacturer should not have the right to tell a purchaser what they can do with something once they have bought and paid for it. If they want to send to a friend as a gift, sell it at a flea market, or put it up on e-Bay, the manufacturer/publisher should have no right to say a word about it. That said, what this kid was doing seems to be more akin to operating an import export business without a proper business license or paying required duties, etc. He was not selling used books, he was reselling new books, in effect operating like a first sale retailer. I have a feeling that the Supreme Court may view this case in this manner so as to issue a very narrow ruling and duck on answering the larger question. This has been a trend with this court and I do not expect that trend to change with this one case.

Nothing to see here....that just those "job creators" doing what they do.

This is the corperate owned America the Right dreams about...

This is absurd... If you buy something it's yours to sell. That's been the way it's been since the beginning of time! I have two bananas and I'll trade you for a pineapple...deal!

Then comes governments who give us cash to represent gold...now the government gives us cash...tells us it's worth something, and we are given cash for work...if we can't sell things, we can't sell cash to trade for items...all commerce will be halted...

This kid did nothing that every bookstore at colleges doesn't do... They buy back the book for half the price and sell it for 3/4s the prices...they make a sick profit to begin with as they charge 10 times the book's value...

Who knows what the real issue is here since nbcnews only highlights what will get readers to read. You can be sure that whatever the result of this case, it isn't going to have anywhere near the ramifications implied in this article. These laws have been in effect for a long time and the issues would have been seen before now. Relax this article was only meant to fire you up and get you excited, not to impart any real information.

So the supreme court doesn't bother with ramifications of rulings they conjure up? It means they do minimum amount of review before deciding cases. Every thing is in the cauldron and all they do is stir, say a few words, and poof its a law. I would expect no less from gov-ment officials. The kid used a loop-hole that has been opened wider than a barn door, and has been for decades.

Basically this means that in America, consumers are getting ripped-off a substantial margin in order to allow many companies to sell the same products in overseas markets for substantially less.

I guess that is what pure unregulated profit is all about, along with globalization of our economy too, as when US manufacturers offshore our jobs, it then becomes less-expensive to sell the same products in foreign markets, and/or more-profitable to sell them here at a higher price.

I could see the US Supreme Court taking this case in a number of directions, including an extreme view that US companies the manufacture offshore should be legally prohibited from selling their products made overseas for any less anywhere else than those same products are sold here, which would be the fairest outcome for US consumers.

I very much doubt that a conservative court will go to an extreme seeking to protect US consumers though.

As for the legitimate sale of used products by individuals and second-hand retail stores, (or even giveaways of secondhand merchandise to the needy), I strongly feel that any SCOTUS decision in the manufacturer's favor here would be tantamount to America becoming a totalitarian dictatorship ruled by an activist conservative judiciary in-favor of corporate interests, one where individuals and their rights need not apply either!

Let's hope that the justices value more than two centuries of individual freedom of the alleged rights of corporations to enforce copyright law over used products.

Ok. The book was marked "NOT FOR EXPORT".

But, It was not exported, it was purchased by a local citizen ...

Then mailed to the child (in the US) (not meeting the legal definition of "export") ...

Then, the child sold the merchandise.

The grey area is ... define "export" (vs) "mailed to family member".

*** My view (and two cents iw way to much to pay) ... the first court ruling was incorrect. The merchandise was purchased by an individual, for individual use, not as an "export" item. Overturn the ruling, but the question will still not be answered. ***

Never under estimate the greed of big business. I remember back in the late 80's and early 90's we had dozens of Tribute bands around my area. Tributes to The Doors, Led Zep, Hendrix, Pink Floyd, and many others. These bands did not make tons of money or play large arena's or make records and as far as the real groups go they probably benefited from these bands creating fans and interest for the real bands and their records. But it all came to an end with threatened law suits and demands for a cut of the meager earnings. and the surprising thing was it wasn't the bands or their management or the record companies who came after these Tribute Bands. It was the Music Publishers. Even if you purchased the sheet music through proper channels it gives you no right to play that music in public (maybe they don't know what musicians do) so even if you don't charge admission you still owe royalties to the publisher. And in case you don't know publishers are lawyers because all they do is copy-write data, books, music, maps, etc. They don't make anything themselves they just publish the work of others then send it off to be turned into a product. Their job is to legally record the data as their property and then sue anyone who doesn't pay or follow their rules for the use of that data. They do not actually make books or records they are just lawyers working in offices. Someone else makes the books or records for them or for the artist's themselves or record companies.

@JS in SD: Definitely agree with your post. He scammed the scammer. They want to gouge US students, and he found a way around it. Assuming he wasn't paying import tax, that may be an issue for him. But that would be an issue between himself and the taxing authority.

@unconventional-6647560 Also agree. Stamping "Illegal to Export" is meaningless. Police service guns are routinely traded into dealers in bulk, and (legally) resold as used bearing stamps such as "Property of ___— Police Dept". Why? Ownership was legally transferred from one entity to another. Exporting certain items can be illegal, but it has to do with items that can be weaponized by foriegn enemies. (GPS, nightvision, etc) In those instances, it doesn't matter what is stamped or not stamped, you just can't do it.

I really don't see how this case would impact flea markets, ebay, etc. These were not used books this guy was selling. They were brand spanking new and had a warning on them that they were not for resale. This meets the first sale rule that protects the publisher. If these were truly used books, then I doubt the federal court would have ruled against him. This idiot flagrantly ignored the warning and got caught. I seriously doubt the "I'm too poor to pay for my crime" is a good enough argument to overturn the ruling. Plus, if they lose, this idiot will have to pay for the publisher's legal fees to defend themselves against the appeal. What a waste of dough. Lawyers sure do have it made.

Elizabeth-1372999

Other than pushing for the Obama, do you have anything to add to the article and what it means. But since you bring it up the publishers are liberals, you know, overeducated monkeys who do anything for a bannana.

The companies save a ton of cost by manufacturing in volume and then ship the excess to secondary markets where they could not compete at the prices they want to charge in the U.S. so the items are sold at their true cost and at a reasonable profit in the secondary market. This leave the publisher in this case to charge as much as the market will bear, which is quite a bit since it's a captive market. The students have to buy the correct book AND edition, ever though there are only minor changes in editions. (Better turn over).

Codified Greed is all it is and they're squealing like the pigs they are.

Aaahhh, the Supreme Court of IDIOTS to rule on another case for the Corporate States of America. They shill and bow down to their corporate masters to get a pat on the head or a pocket full of money or both. Why does everything in this country cost 100 times more than in the rest of the world when it's the same product or manufacture?? This is why I buy my drugs and most of my personal products by mail from Canada or a quick trip to Mexico. There is no such thing as copyright protection, anything can be had for free if you know where to look!!

The problem, if I am reading this correctly, is that the books are sold for much less overseas because the area they were sold in. That means that this student could buy them for much less overseas, then import those books and sell them for less then the market cost of them here. If he were allow to do so then what they are afraid of is his little business would unfairly proffit while the booksellers here cannot be competitive with that price.

It is sort of a prime example of what is happening in world trade. Our country for the most part cannot be competitive in price for imported goods. Hence we lose here. The price on those books overseas must be extremely lower than the price here in the States.

No matter which way this goes, it is a good lesson to all of us as to why we are not competitive on a global market.

OH, and some of you are correct that we are charged much more, and I don't think it is the cost of manufacturing so much as it is the amount of profit they want to make.

As I see it, the first books were possibly okay, they were imported for personal use. When he decided to make a business of it, that is what violated the law. As for garage sales/flea markets - most of us are selling books, old iphones, etc, that were imported by the authorized importer, so resale of those items would not be affected by any decision coming out of this case. Same thing with your used Toyota or other foreign made vehicle - imported legally, can be resold on the open market. The books in this case were imported illegally, and that is the difference between this case and your yard sale.

Just another reason not to vote for Romney. This may be the one issue we all know where he stands on.

Globalization or Protectionism. Sounds like someone is trying to have it both ways.

Exactly Dragonmaster. Companies have had it their way for so long, with the advent of the internet, consumers have become more savvy.

Corporations/companies want it both ways; the ability to operate globally and the ability to control globally. Are the courts going to rule in favor of protecting the consumer or protecting the corporations?

Great point Joy

and if expanded only slightly, people might understand why outsourcing is happening...Not only can the US not sell our Made in America to most of the world, because of the costs of production here at home and their relatively low costs of Labor over there, and their citizens resulting lower incomes...and because of our trade imbalance, we cant even sell our Made in America products over here, because they can send there products here and sell them cheaper than we can produce them...

Which only really leaves Interanational American Based Companies one choice, open factories there so our products can compete in their markets, and import some back home so we can compete with their imports

Pigotry: "undeserved wealth"?....are you the aribitor of what is "undeserved"...if so, who granted you that power and authority?

Debi: Corporations are people.

Gee, I always thought that it meant the a person could not make a copy and sell the original or copies made from the original, if a person bought it they own it and can sell it as long as another copy was not made does that make sense ....

anti-trust proponent,

I can this coversation NOT FO READERS UNDER 21, CONTAINS PORNOGRAPHY, but merely affixing that text neither makes the conversation pornographic nor prohibits those under 21 from participating. Is there clear evidence that Wiley and Sons (producers of primarilarly mathematics and engineering texts, and save for medical texts, among the most expensive) had agreements with regional governments to produce texts at lower rates if the regional governments restrained or banned exports?

But I think the real story here is that these publishers are charging American students substantially more than students in other countries. Are we to believe that the same textbook, obviously printed in English if Kirtsaeng was selling in the volumes indicated, are produced for Thailand at a loss, as some form of charity? Or is the real truth that Wiley and Sons are gouging "rich" American students, simply because they can?

And the greater truth, textbooks, which can run to $500 or more per school term, have something of a seedy business history in the US. Used texts sold through college bookstores usually retail at 75% of the cost of a new text, when they are available. But used texts in good clean condition may be sold back at many college bookstores for 50% at the top end for a new edition in short supply, to as little as 10% for texts one or two editions out of print or in disfavor in academia. Some texts simply have no post coursework value. I recall a frustrated student at Iowa State stuck with a $100 text some 25years ago; he nailed it to a board, doused it with gas or lighter fluid, floated it on Lake Laverne and lit it off -- a Viking funeral.

Used texts are NOT a local business to the bookstore, but are a national business which gathers in texts and then redistributes them on the basis of school text lists for the coming year. Consider that a small 4year college may have as many as 1000 texts, where major universities may have 10times that many. And publishers have a vested interest in creating new editions every two or three years, at first to correct errata, but then to create a market for new texts. Often the changes are cosmetic or formatting related, but page numbers, graph and illustration codes and other changes get made; requiring lecturers and lesson guides to be readjusted; requiring students to buy the new edition text to stay on track with the lectures and assigned work.

BAT: Eloquently said what needed to be said. Their Idiots.

Or is the real truth that Wiley and Sons are gouging "rich" American students, simply because they can?

I'd say without a doubt that is that case. It's exactly what the schools are doing to American students. They can because they're immune to pricing pressure because of guaranteed student loans.

If 2nd rate publishers from overseas print books by scanning and copying, the ecomomy of enovation is doomed. I think it already is. The authors of science texts math texts, literature etc.. will become extinct. Supap didn't write the material in the tet books he was selling, yet he was profiting from the work, at the exclusion of the person who took the time and did the research to write it. What a shameful way to make a living.

Debi: Corporations are people.

Yes, one of the many missteps of our politicized Supreme Court.

Supap didn't write the material in the tet books he was selling, yet he was profiting from the work

Neither do the schools write the text, although they too profit even much more than Supap.

You may own IP rights but the book is mine, unless when I am done ur willing to buy it back at market value.

U didn't lease the book you sold it, it ain't yours no more.

Of all the SC decisions...this one could easily have the largest reverbirations...I hope they realize this when writting their decision...and I'm not quite sure how I'd like them to decide it

Oh, this guy is clearly guilty. Items were marked "Exportation from or importation of this book to another region without the publisher's authorization is illegal" and that is usually for a reason. Thanks for being greedy buddy!! You just possibly screwed a LOT of people..

There have been a LOT of poor folks going to college for years and they all survived on a shoe-string budget. It is what keeps you thinking and on your toes. You kids who think it is a gravy train are completely nuts. Buck up and have some guts, kids. The system is set up. USE it to your advantage, if not then maybe college is not for you..

And we wonder what is wrong with our economy... Maybe if the books were actually printed HERE in America instead of overseas... That is the only reason they are able to charge different prices is that they are using the CHEAPEST labor possible. No wonder that CEO is able to make so much money... It does not take intelligence to do that, it takes stupidity. How long does it take to redistribute the wealth of the middle class overseas while skimming some off the top? How much longer can the redistribution continue to go on? As long as they do not have to pay any taxes or have to pay for anyone that they took all of that money from. All the extra profits and money they make goes to offshore bank accounts which hurts our economy even more. How much money can you pull out of it and still expect it to run? "You should work harder"... That is their answer to everything "hard work", take two and call me in the morning... Here let me put you in this concrete box without any tools and expect you to get out. Now make sure you "work hard" at it, I am sure it will make all the difference.

If they paid their workers more then they could not charge so little for the books in the country that they were made in. They would not be able to price gouge Americans for every nickel and dime they can get. CEO's and others could not make record profits off the backs of the middle class here in America. If a book even costs $5 to make in that country and they are selling them for about $200 here how can you not make a profit or be successful? How many other American companies use this same failed strategy? That is until you have bleed the middle class dry in this country of money and you have no more customers left that can pay that higher, inflated, overpriced item.

Can their business plan "work"? NO, it FAILS given enough time. If there was not another country for them to exploit cheap labor in then their profit margins would be much much less. Their whole plan revolves around using cheap labor to produce products that drives other companies out of business, ones that actually pay their employees a fair wage. It is not because they run the company any better or more efficient. It is due to them exploiting cheap labor and environmental regulations, THAT IS ALL. If there was not a country to exploit labor in and there was one country. How could that company make a profit? IT WOULD NOT.

The gravy train is running out and companies will be forced to operate off of less profit margin. Owners, CEOs, stockholders are going to be losing money ANYWAY. The short term gains that they sold out America for are coming to an end is all. Had they played by the rules and had been good leaders we would not be suffering now. The problem is they were allowed to acquire to much money for their own good, and now they think it is "theirs". They have fought tooth and nail over the last years destroying America and its people in the process, all so they can try to keep the gravy train going, and keep what they think is theirs. I wonder what happened to the American family. Hard to have family values or a society when it is money, money, money, mine, mine, mine, mine.

He should have just sold them as "used" instead of "new" and he would have been fine.

I would just like to say how proud I am of the vine for ignoring trolls and refusing to be pulled into side discussions about certain political candidates. Keep it up folks! If no one pays attention, maybe they will stop.

The system is set up. USE it to your advantage,...

Uh Dave, I believe that's exactly what Supap did. He used the system to his advantage.

Isn't that the tried and true American way? Game the system in order to get ahead? He learned his lessons well.

Nice try Mitty, reverse psychology...you almost got me...hows the weather in Ohio

This decision could define what the terms; ownership, buy, sell, and property rights means for decades

Kindal already forbids the transfer of "ebooks", even between family members or your own second device...when I buy my next DVD will it include an Auto erase after 1 viewing? I was watching a spot earlier today about a company who specializes in used cell phones...will a blanket for the homeless guy soon be a Felony?

@poorman

eBay restricts the shipping costs on certain items for this very reason. People were doing this on DVD's and such years ago just to get a lot of views or a sucker that didn't look at the shipping cost on the auction page. I'm sure that they would either have a flatout ban of college textbooks or limit the shipping cost games.

If the corporation which produces the goods I buy continues to own those goods forever.....that makes me a RENTER......and I will demand prices be slashed by at LEAST fifty percent. I'm also thinking I shouldn't have to pay *sales* taxes either.

Elizabeth followed by numbers

wake up and smell what you are shoveling

Debi followed by numbers

"Yes, one of the many missteps of our politicized Supreme Court"

just like the politicized misstep called The Unaffordable Care Act otherwise known as "Obonehead Care"

Tired followed by numbers

your entire lefty diatribe is aptly described by you tag "tired" as well as played out

If the corporation which produces the goods I buy continues to own those goods forever.....that makes me a RENTER......

Yes, very similar to the concepts of a fiefdom, just a more modern version.

Anti-Trust- JS in SD beat me to it. This is NOT a copyright law issue, it is a commerce issue masquerading as a copyright issue so that the publishers (and other manufacturers) can market to the US at an inflated price.

The reach of the Internet made this an issue that would inevitably make it to SCOTUS. Can a manufacturer sue because you didn't follow the instructions printed on the carton? Or because they lobbied for laws that would protect their US margins and got them? Does that make them appropriate and just?

Shouldn't any party that is willing to go to the expense and hassle of shipping these goods from these far distances reap the benefits of the price differential?

This is another example of how businesses have had the lawmakers in their back pocket (like movie and music copyright owners) to pass laws that the public wasn't aware of until they are brought to light in this manner, and end up infringing on secondary market free enterprise or a private owner's right to do whatever they like with goods they have purchased legally.

Elizabeth-1372999: Democrats are the ones doing this not Republicans. I love how you spin everything.

It argues that any erosion of copyright protection for overseas sales would limit a manufacturer's ability to tailor prices to global markets. [from the article]

If a company outsources its production, call centers or other operations to other countries, then it should have no grounds to complain when its products are bought outside the US and imported into the US. After all, if it is a global market for companies, then it should be a global market for consumers, too.

So the moral is...when you import books for $30.00 including shipping and re-sell to students living in poverty with enormous Tuition debt for 60.00 (instead of $200.00) Take them out of the Package first to make them look USED.

I don't know. Do the laws prohibit exporting used books for sale?

This goes so much further than just books, DVD and other such material.If something is created and the person who has the rights to it forbids redistribution or resale after individual first sale, remember this could affect what is given to charity or a library, we are looking at the end of the second hand market for practically anything.

People could become forced to repurchasing or going without, those items once the original is no longer usable. Remember the fact much of what we are buying is cheaply made, with a built in time disposable factor. Just think how suddenly we will have companies tracking what we purchase when filling out that registry card, and our government snooping into our daily lives on an even higher level unimagined in our history.

Make no mistake, we take for granted right now the ability to give away,share with our family and friends, items we have purchased as gifts. It may seem this wouldn't fall under changes such altered copyright laws might bring. But recall, it even affects what one gives that is donated to charities like Goodwill, or libraries, once you no longer keep it. Often laws that are meant with good intentions, end up having terrible consequences never foreseen by those who passed them down the road. Affecting innocent people who never were intended as a victim of such a law

.With it affecting areas unforeseen because it was only looked at solving a specific area where there was a problem.But the law ended up spreading like a plague because we humans are a greedy, contentious lot who pretty much only look out for our own interests. Dragging anyone into court for our own selfish ends,that dares get in our way.

Want to know why Americans can't afford to shop? Because we are gouged to death. The rest of the world gets the same @!$%# for cheaper prices.

The last 4 years every 3 months I drive my mother to Canada(20 miles away for me) with her subscriptions she pays $45 dollars and a Canadian doctor spends 5 minutes with her making sure she needs them and then writes them over to Canadian scripts. We then get them filled for 60% less in a Canadian pharmacy than an American pharmacy. She saves $1200 on a 3 month supply. I learned how to do this from my pharmacist after he told me he was worried about her cutting back on her meds. He said we are subsidizing Canada's pharmaceuticals and we could buy them in Canada for cheaper than he can get them from the manufacturer. In Canada name brand meds are cheaper than generic here and Canada also has generic versions for meds that our market doesn't have yet. What do you think my mother does with that extra $400 a month? She spends it and at a dozen trips to multiple small businesses.

Rhazes

First, hope your Mom is doing well.

Second, I didn't realize the cost of the scrips would be so big across our borders. Having said that our government has taken steps to limit how much big or little pharma can gouge sick people. Those companies obviously are still make money here though or why sell here? I don't think you guys are subsidizing us, you're just getting screwed. Not uppity, just saying.

As to school books, screwed on both sides of the border. The cost of my Organic Chemistry book almost blew the eyes out of my head when I was in U, same with my daughters books now.

Related to books and what makes no sense: the paperback book I just finished reading (Code to Zero - Ken Follett - I'd recommend) prices @ $7.99 US, $10.99 Can. Since the Loonie and the Greenback are essentially even how does that make sense?

Again, good health to your Mom however you have to do it.

my question is why is so much cheaper overseas? I would think that is price gouging the american public as is the differance in madical and medicine cost and i for one am tired of things being more costly here to make up for the lower cost overseas

The big companies want all the benefits of globalization and want the increased profits of protectionism. If this kid was able to make 100,000 selling textbooks that should introduce competition into the market place. The company John Wiley & Sons should be lowering their prices in order to compete. Not trying to sue him into oblivion. Monopolization is not capitalism. Companies such as these deserve to be ripped off.

Most of the people in this country are like cattle in a feed lot. They mill around talking about what was on TV last night, not realizing that they are being slowly pushed into the slaughter house. For about 50 years the corporations, the big banks, big oil, have known that if you slowly squeeze and squeeze, people won't even feel what is happening until they can only move in one direction. It's like the frog that is put in a pan of cold water, then the heat is turned up very, very slowly. The frog doesn't even know he is being cooked alive until he is hard boiled.

With us it is the same. We have these two seemingly very different political parties, at each other throats, they get nothing done for years. But in the back rooms away from the TV cameras, all the deals are done, and as the people are caught up in all the flaming discourse, the out and out racism, the haves and the have nots, we are skinned alive. All the big money guys have taken over our country. Democracy is dead, and the oligarchs in Political-Industrial Complex have taken over. They don't even have to hide anymore. The supreme court does their business, openly, "citizens united", as it were. The big money buys our politicians, big banks makes our financial laws, as the their greed runs amok, all of sudden our whole world economy goes into the toilet. The tax payers bail them out, then they foreclose on the taxpayers houses, because the taxpayers are broke, there are no jobs. Later the banks start reselling all the foreclosed houses at a profit for them, and also for a profit to those who bought the houses at reduced prices. Now we are getting ready to elect one of the biggest oligarchs in the country for president, who promises really big change, no @!$%#! What new deckchair do you want to use, aboard the Titanic!!!

You guys just don't get it. The law allows companies to screw their customers. And if you find out and figure out a way around the shaft - then you are breaking the law. It is not about what is fair, but rather about profit.

And the SCOTUS will rule in favor of business - just like they have before. Remember - corporations are people too. And we cannot deprive them of the right to screw the rest of us. That would be 'immoral'.

Don't forget congress - they are the ones who passed a law protecting the right of business to protect stuff not even made in the USA. It used to be that only stuff manufactured in the USA was protected. But why protect Americans when congress can protect those poor Chinese (or Indonesians). Congress knows who they are elected to serve.

Wouldn't that also affect pawn shops, video game and system retailers that buy back games and equipment? What about used book stores? A law like that could wipe out a whole swath of the economy. Agree with others, If I buy something, it is mine and I should be able to do whatever I want with it after that.

Having said that our government has taken steps to limit how much big or little pharma can gouge sick people. Those companies obviously are still make money here though or why sell here? I don't think you guys are subsidizing us, you're just getting screwed.

I'm sure the drug companies are recovering their incremental costs even though prices are tightly controlled in Canada, but how much are they making back towards their tremendous R&D costs? That's been the argument ... that US consumers pay for the R&D that benefits all those countries that impose tight price controls. And, I think there's something to that point of view.

Remember - corporations are people too.

Actually, corporations are shells formed to protect people. People don't have the same protections as shells.

Amazon is taking that measure because they don't want to run into the logistical aggravation of supporting their books on the cloud indefinitely, and simultaneously, they dread the idea of actually letting you DL the book entirely because of the obvious risk one will just indefinitely duplicate it and violate the copyright that way.

This is going to be a major turnoff for people regarding 'the cloud' in general. You don't OWN anything if it is in the cloud...at best, it's an indefinite lease that the cloud-service can revoke at any time.

That's why I always order real books and won't have a Nook or Kindle or any other of those things. The idea that a company can erase something you paid for from your e-reader without any recourse is, or should be, criminal.

Ha-Ha! Tape Recorder,8MM, VCR, Digital Cameras and Video, Iphones! OMG! OMG! So they studied real hard on this one did they?

I prefer real books to electronic books.. one thing is if the electricity goes down I can still read a book by candle light. If your e-reader has a battery and it dies and you cannot replace it, your out of it.. a book if taken care of is forever.

Okie joe...I have a Kindle and no one is erasing any of the books that I've down-loaded and paid for...unless I'm the one that is eliminating them...where are you getting your bogus information?

YET!

i agree with bob the gov has its hands in way to much and it will soon be able to controll what people read as the msm has already shown. I believe that is the beginning of the end for so called free america we people need to stand together and show the gov that it should listen to us. Like the hcb the majority of us are against this but it was rammed up our arses by the ins that said we have to pass it to know whats in it and a scotus that is nothing more than a yes panel

@ juanita dominguez

Amazon simply didn't erase a book that YOU bought.

But ironically, that's not so much the case for the people that bought the George Orwell book 1984 or Animal Farm

At least we shall have solace that one day (assuming we continue on the path we are headed) that their great (great?) grandchildren will be looking on from their well-guarded, gated communities at the angry, seething throngs of people without bread and wonder why they do not simply eat cake.

Companies have pricing down to a science. They have people working full time figuring out the best ways to squeeze each cent out of the consumer while the consumers are busy working and trying to live. Our money is being used to subsidise these foreign countries and our "public servants" aren't doing anything to stop it.

An example is the new GM plant recently built in Mexico while GM still owes the American taxpayers $Billions of dollars....who allowed this to happen?

I'm afraid that "We, the People" let it happen. Keep voting (or not voting, get off your asse$ and vote) the same people in.

CONGRESS! CONGRESS! HOUSE of Representatives. Over six hundred officials right there. The President or what I refer to as the one in the oral office.

Bob, better check your math.

The House and Senate have 535 members. 435 in the House and 100 in the Senate.

If you produced a product that requires copyrights to protect it from essentially being stolen and for you to make money (copyrights protect the author/artist rights to make money off of their creation), then explain why this chump has the right, on American soil, to import new books at cheaper prices, to be resold at retail. That's called STEALING. Companies have the right to produce/ship/sell products all over the world. If they happen to sell their products cheaper in other markets, that's just the way it is.

Copyrights are there to protect authors/artists/publishers of original works so that they can make money. They have that right, you know. To have someone come in and undersell their market in the way this guy did is illegal.

I know ya'll would be bitchin up a storm if this was a Chinese company selling super cheap steel, undercutting the market. That's exactly what this non-American idiot did. I've been to Thailand and they're as bad as the Chinese when it comes to stealing copyrighted material. This guy should have be deported from American soil in addition to being fined $600K.

NYMike: I said over, did you count the Interns to? There the ones who actually read the bills so the politicians have an idea what they are about. If they are the ones doing the real work then they should be counted. If you ask any politician what is in a bill they will not be able to tell you.

@ Smokey'sMom

Because the publisher is deliberately trying to charge a higher price in the US and a lower price abroad to maximize profits and they are trying to crush competition that can deliver their legally purchased product at a cheaper rate

Look at MSRP for an interesting history. There's a reason why part of that acronym states "Suggested"

It's because the manufacturers are barred from being able to directly dictate how much independent retailers may charge.

The short-form of all of this debacle is called a "grey market". The products are purchased legally at the cheapest rate possible, and routed around various protectionist organizations and cartels that the producers try to put up as a wall to inflate the price.

The publisher can put any language they want on the front of the book like "not for export", if there's no law that actually stands behind that claim, there's no legal recourse for the publisher to sue.

I hope the Supreme Court doesn't tread over more precedent to give another handout to this kind of disgusting business practice. Copyright was not violated, these are books purchased through legitimate channels for resale...the only thing the publisher doesn't like is that it goes against their cartel.

Smokey'sMom, if you are in favor of this publisher's actions, then I hope you are at least consistent and will gladly defend the actions of OPEC and their manipulation of world oil prices as well!

If not, then you are a hypocrite.

well, yes, and most of us do. we are not importers, we are reselling things we purchased here in the US. Things that were imported legally. This guy made a business of importing illegally and selling. I understand his reasoning, but he did break the law. selling your iphone on EBay does not break the law, because it was imported legally, and thus can be sold again by the end user. A ruling against this guy by the Supremes will not impact Ebay and your garage sales.

Don't bet on it Jon. Even on eBay they have VEROS, verified rights owners, who can have any auction ended if they decide that the item is "fake". These are sellers who have backing from the company or designer. Doesn't matter if you have a receipt. You still get the auction ended and a strike against you... Three strikes and you are banned for life... It has been that way for years... I have heard of cases like that in court and eBay will only back the VEROS, not the average seller...

sheep - I have been involved with ebay regarding veros. However, I agree with Jon. Unless you are selling grey market items, then there is no issue. Even then, if you sold a handful of grey market items, I would seriously doubt anyone would come after you - I would expect they are concerned about the excessive abusers - very similar to how piracy is currently handled.

For me, I see this as a scare tactic from ebay. ebay sees that this could have a huge negative impact on their bottom line because some of their largest sellers sell grey market items. However, I would expect that this would not impact 99% of ebays normal sellers and 100% of garage sales.

Exactly! This guy is just being smart and engaging in free trade. You shouldn't punish people like that!

..

Knowingly breaking the law is not "being smart". The problem is not that he bought and sold books. The problem is that he imported books, knowing that it was illegal, and sold them. You can legally purchase as many items as you want and resell them. You can even go overseas and buy things to sell, as long as you are not breaking import/export laws. African businessmen go to China all the time and purchase good to resell in Africa. This is not against Chinese law or against the law in their home countries. This case is not so much about copyright protection as it is about trade agreements. Publishers don't give a hoot if you sell books after you've read them.

His parents purchased books, sent them to him and he chose to sell them. You're stating that b/c he didn't read them first, it makes the transaction illegal? But had he done so, it would have been okay? So if a student drops a class and wants to sell the book(s) s/he purchased, s/he can't do so until s/he reads the material? Not buying the argument.

He took a calculated risk that he was selling an item marked not for export; there is no doubt there. The ripple effect of the decision on this case will be significant, as so many have pointed out. This is a question of imposed authority and corporate bullying.

Cuba wants to open its doors to tourism and FL grouses about losing their marketshare. Again, protectionism vs. open-markets. You can't say drill baby drill in hopes of driving down domestic pump prices unless you nationalize oil, subsidize consumers or eliminate speculators. The point is whether you want consumer protection or 'market' protection.

Another example: if I, as a car collector, decide to buy a car from the showroom and don't drive it, is it still new? Do I owe the mfr some additional royalty if I sell the car for more than I paid for it? Am I only exempt from such policies if I choose to only purchase/sell one model of that particular vehicle?

The consequences of this decision are many and it doesn't take too much imagination to see the potential ripple effect it will cause.

i think it should be illegal for the manufacturers to get products made overseas for a fraction and sell in US at exhorbitant prices and just becasue they didnt write - "donot export" on it. As long as that is legal, buying stuff abroad and doing whatever with it should also be legal. Corporate greed knows no bounds and they will suck you dry one way or the other. Why do you think there is so much trade deficit for US.

When Products are not made in US, the benefit to the society from the manufacturing economy is going to place that is manufacturing it and the profit is going into the pockets of big corporations, the americans are left holding the bill...economy is draining.

What this kid did is absolutely no different from what the corporations are doing, except that they pay to have law on their side and american economy is the one that is draining.....real fast.

Shame on the Supreme court. Its job is not to uphold the law that is written but to continously monitor is the laws makes sense and rewrite those. it should review the law written here and provide some common sense to it as well. If corporations can do it , then why not general public; and why this huge proce discrepancy...and who is to blame for draining economy?

Supreme court must also ban all products made overseas to be sold in US by firms for humungus profit, or they should be charged penalty (other nations call it excise) to recover the lost oppurtunities of benefitting from the manufacturing cycle. Supreme court should not be above the "jury of the peers". Thats where i want to see this case tried and I would want to be the juror on that as well.

Think about some more. I bought used books in college and this could end that because the publisher could simplely say resale is prohibited regardless.

WinWin4All,

I agree with you. There is a big difference between purchasing one book for yourself and reselling it then creating a business buying and importing a product that is sold overseas new and selling it here in the states. I wonder what that same court would rule when you purchase a bunch of items new and sell it on eBay. You hear all the time how someone purchased 20 game systems or a new gadget to sell in the Internet.

Win win you have a point but your fighting the tide and so are the publishers. Globalization is real and its inevitable. I hate to say it but if you believe in the free market you have to let things like this happen and let the prices normalize because of it.

See my post above. According the version of the story on Bloomberg, these books purchased in Thailand were clearly marked NOT FOR EXPORT. The guy and his family broke the law by exporting/importing the clearly marked books, and I think that will be the basis of the SCOTUS ruling.

They were the same book from the same publisher!!

The best deal I ever got was when I was taking an International Business course. They wanted $110 for the book at the bookstore, so I found the book on ebay for $3.95 from a seller in India. It was the 10th Edition, and I needed the 11th edition, but I bought it anyway. It cost me $4.95 in shipping. It was the exact same book my classmates had except some of the pages had different page numbers. The content was the same, which shows you how you get ripped off when schools try to force you to buy newer editions. The only other difference was that the book was half the weight. It was a thousand page book, but mine had almost tissue paper thin pages. The book was new and used, but did smell like curry, or something that reminded you of curry. In fact it really smelled, but for less then $10, it was worth putting up with.

So how did this book sell for so cheap in India, but cost so much more in the U.S.? I don't really know what someone over there paid for it, but they had to have sold it for a profit.

I bought other text books the same way, but this was the best deal I ever got. Other great deals can be found at campusbooks.com.

If the books the student was selling were used, this case should be thrown out. If they were new, then the publishing house may have a case.

The publishing house sold the books in two divergent markets - one was sold overseas for a small amount and here, in the states, they sold the book for a high price. They gouged Americans to start with. Now they are p*ssed that we found a way to get their product less expensively. They didn't want it exported from overseas because that would cut into their American profits.

Regarding used items; if I bought it I have the right to resell it. I can't duplicate it and sell the copies, but I certainly have the right to sell the original.

WinWin and Subnormal, you're missing the point. This is the same thinking that was behind the BigPharm move to ban the import of drugs from Canada and prevent Medicare from negotiating drug prices with suppliers. It's all about greed, pure and simple. For all the blather about 'free market capitalism', when it's their ox getting gored these guys are quick to circle the wagons and prevent anybody from showing up their hypocrisy.

As for the remarks about 'american jobs', that's a red herring. The cost of reproducing intellectual property is almost always miniscule (a CD or DVD costs less than $1 to make at the manufacturing level), you can't tell me the whole price difference is in the printing/binding of the book. This is all about extracting the maximum profit from a captive market...

BPGrape - You've just made my point. We live in America and have a higher standard of living than most other countries. Things cost more here because we expect to earn livable wages. The book you bought for less than $4 was produced by workers who likely make 50¢ an hour - or day. (Now I agree that $110 for a textbook here is outrageous, way overpriced, even if union workers were printing it.) But when you buy a book that was created in a 3rd world country, you got a super bargain, and some American go laid off work.

ZenPaladin - That's the problem and the free market will not fix it. If we let the free market run the global economy, it's a race to the bottom. We're already seeing the effects. People in America are poorer because our jobs went to other countries. This forces Americans to work for less and less. There has to be some protections so we can maintain our jobs and quality of life.

It's entirely possible that the books are all printed in another country, but sold at a higher price in the US. Corporations are happy with international trade as long as it works in their favor with lower wages and less protection for labor and the environment, but let a consumer try to get the same cost advantage in buying products and you see what happens. The publishing and pharmaceutical industries are especially successful in isolating the US market and greatly inflating the cost for US consumers.

@ WinWin4All

Your absolutely right. With no protection America suffers. But are you really for artificial propping up of Jobs and the economy? I just cant imagine that such a thing can be sustainable. It hurts and it sucks but I honestly don't think the government can fix it if we force companies to pay American's more they will just go out of business or leave the country. If we deliberately chose to buy more expensive American made goods we will support our own economy (temporarily) but we still lose purchasing power and therefor other companies will invest where there is more money to be made.

I figure the only way to win is to adapt to it and survive it. If we invest in education and high tech we can lead the planet with the most highly educated (and there for valuable) workforce and keep the best jobs for ourselves while allowing the rest of the world to do the crappy grunt work.

Howy61 -- The way textbook publishers force you to buy new books is to have the author make some small revision so the publisher puts out a new edition and all the old books are unusable.

Robert, you can look at the Copyright page of a book to see where it was printed. If the book is published in the US and is in English then probably all English copies are printed here and exported. If so, then they all cost the same to make and should cost the same everywhere(adjusted for shipping costs or subsidies.) If you pay a lot more here than in another country then you are being ripped off.

It's easy to say what this kid did was illegal and he should be punished, but you have to look at all the implications of this case, and that's what makes it complicated. If you punish this kid, you're going to have to punish all used book sellers, and the sellers of many other used products. It's not easy to track goods; when used book sellers buy from people, they have no idea where those people got the books from in the first place; things change hands to many times in most cases. And incriminating this kid would also be incriminating countless other people who unknowingly participated in something "illegal."

I bought all my books used in college; most students don't have the money to pay $600 or more a semester in books. It's just another way for the education system to profit by overcharging students anyway.

The thing is if he bought them new there, he paid what the copywriter was asking.. there fore they are considered used.

So much for the souvenir industry.

Wal-Mart was my first thought on this. I can't imagine they are not having legal wranglings of this sort as well. After all, China is pretty much their biggest suppier/importer/exporter.

look if the dam school would stop cheating out of money then we wouldnt have to go to extream messures to get money for college education but hey if he made 100000 dollars whyn the f$%# he needs college )))) go and meke money i say.. now a days even a colleged degree person cant find a job

The Rx drug issue popped into my head too when reading this. However, I realized drugs (and most other non-artistic items) are protected by Patents and not Copyrights.

I'm an IT geek not an IP Attorney, but I know there is a huge difference between Copyrights and Patents.

Since these laws deal with Copyrights only, it seems entirely reasonable to import drugs from another country for resale here at a lower price.

I'm sure there are plenty of regulations though to ensure they are not altered, are marked with FDA info, not going to cause fungal meningitis, etc...

It's becoming a throw-away society... just keep wasting money and resources.

And I bet that you are a leeching Democrat.

And I'll bet this isn't even a Political issue but the spin goes on.

Why not just send him back straightaway and save the taxpayers the cost of his imprisonment? Silly Colorado-Man......

It would be funny if the textbook editions sold in the US at inflated prices were printed in China or Taiwan or India. It's entirely possible that they are all print in the same place, in separate batches with "Not For Export" on those going to low-cost countries. What happens to the saving American jobs argument in that case? How would you justify selling books printed in China and imported legally to the US by the publisher, and then calling the importation by an individual illegal?

Can't send him back. He was bought here.

Why do you hate the Free Market (TM) Colorado?

For that matter, how will Libraries be affected?

Our Library of Congress could do what I've been advocating: Make all our Congresspeople criminals.

Printing "Not For Export" on a book doesn't make it illegal to export unless there is a law in place in the exporting country which gives that statement the force of law. That, of course, doesn't make it illegal to import the book unless the importing country has a law forbidding the import of such books.

No, you can purchase that book in Japan, probably much cheaper than stateside. What these companies are arguing is that you can't offer other people stateside that same cheaper price. They want that premium price for their product from Americans.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

***edit/fix last line of my post so the point isn't missed. It's a very good point that should be considered***

Big business does that with American jobs. They can shortchange Americans to save money by moving their labor force halfway around the world, but American consumers can't purchase a product from a foreign market because big business feels they're entitled to charge me more just because I am an American!?

I agree 100%, I couldn't have said it better myself. 2 thumbs up!!

companies can go overseas for cheap labor but Americans can't get overseas pricing or go overseas to get competitive pricing

keep overseas labor but make the companies charge overseas prices and this potentially would even the "no american jobs" playing field drastically

It comes down to choices and protecting the open market. If book sellers don't want someone to purchase a book for a cheaper price at location A, then they can simply raise the price at location A. This students actions don't inhibit their choice to do so. How ever, not allowing student to get the book at a cheaper price does inhibit his choice.

The answer is simple. SP should side with the students since that doesn't infringe on anyone's rights and choices.

what is the difference between the 2? that company got their money in full from the kid who bought from them. they produced a generic cheaper copy of what was alreayd out there - so now the kid cant do it with what he bought with his own money? this is wrong.

the company sounds desperate for money than they should sell to the US and make more, and leave the kid alone.

what the what?