|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 16 2012 @ 10:57 PM EDT |
IANAL either, but I've been on the short end of publisher's runarounds.
Wiley publish in both Bangkok(Singapore?) and New York just so they
can be devious. The SE Asian price is lower, to attract an audience.
The US price is higher, because the audience is captive by faculty
textbook compulsions. The Asian copy was not published by the
US faction, thus it is an unauthorised copy. Nothing to do with
Import Duty, and likely not much to do with First Sale either, and
the publisher would like you to think it's nothing to do with personal
baggage either. I can see that careful use for a one semester paper
would leave a book in condition to command up to the locaL SRP,
and eight books isn't many over a whole degree.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 17 2012 @ 07:27 AM EDT |
To remind you, I said IANAL, I am speculating.
First, the direct answer to your request, 'please point to the section of
Copyright Law' is to simply refer you back to the original Yahoo article.
The student has already been convicted of copyright infringement and sentenced,
the court either made the law(precedent) or applied the law, or a bit of both.
He now has a $600,000 axe hanging over him.
Thus a court has already decided that the books being sold were illegal copies.
This I believe is fact (IANAL).
What are the grounds for that decision?
Is it because US copyright extends to the whole world, even goods manufactured
outside the US and protected under another sovereign states IP regime? This I
believe is opinion of the nature of the question going to the Supreme Court
(IANAL)
One court appears to have decided the answer is yes, US Copyright covers a book
printed and sold in a different country, covered by IP rights in another country
and imported to the USA, and convicted the student. First Sale does not apply to
the books he imported. This is speculation on the courts decision (IANAL).
The decision of that court is now going before the Supreme Court. This I believe
is fact (IANAL)
So now, given that it is an appeal, there are questions to be asked, this is an
opportunity ripe for speculation.
If US copyright does not/cannot cover such goods, thereby giving due respect to
IP rights in the originating nation, then under what grounds might the
conviction still be valid? (after all, we don't expect Judges to make basic
mistakes) This is speculation.
What is it that makes those books illegitimate?
Well for one, if you import goods to the USA and do not pay import duty, those
goods are illegal and subject to seizure. This, I believe, is fact (IANAL).
I don't think that there is any question the student was importing for commerce,
and given he was probably doing it one at a time, it's unlikely he paid any
import duty. This is speculation.
While that may make the books in question illegitimate goods, does it follow
from there that they are at the same time illegitimate copies? This is
speculation.
If that is the case then it raises the question, if he had paid import duty,
would the books then become legitimate copies? This is speculation.
And is it that which is the limiting factor on the courts decision to find the
student guilty of copyright infringement?
I speculate that it could be viewed as a Grey Market/Import question rather than
a First Sale question. If that were so that no new law or precedent is being
set, or is required (IANAL), and the law does like to do nothing if it's
possible to get the result you want from doing nothing.
Hope that helps.
FWIW IM(NS)HO, I think Wiley are double dipping, they have licensed the IP
rights to the manufacturer in foreign country, so they've been paid. the article
opines re goods produced in the US, exported for sale abroad, and then
reimported, in this case the goods are IP, not the books, the books are licensed
reproductions of the exported IP goods (IANAL).
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
