Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

First Sale Bases | 227 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

First Sale Bases

Authored by: mcinsand on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 01:09 PM EDT

Can anyone familiar with the related underpinnings comment on what might bolster
or undermine First Sale stipulations? I can see how restricting a sale would
apply to a business relationship (loan, selling agency, distributorship, service
contracts), I can't see how a buyer should not inherently have rights to sell
with paid-in-clear licenses and physical objects. A book might be copyrighted,
but the copyright is with the licensed copy. As with many of the terms we find
in EULA's, first sale seems to me to be either an illegal over-reach of
copyright law or what should be an illegal over-reach.

Anyway, if anyone can address my ignorance, I'd be grateful.

Regards,
mc

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

With that reasoning, one could say the situation is appropriate - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 01:53 PM EDT
- 'business relationship' - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 03:48 PM EDT
  - That's one perspective - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 04:46 PM EDT
    - That's one perspective - Authored by: tknarr on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 06:02 PM EDT
      - Interesting analogy - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 06:54 PM EDT
        Interesting analogy - Authored by: tknarr on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 08:33 PM EDT
        But it's long-settled law in the US that they do not have a monopoly on sales - partially true - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 09:00 PM EDT
        But it's long-settled law in the US that they do not have a monopoly on sales - partially true - Authored by: tknarr on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 03:37 PM EDT
        Fair Use isn't a right - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 07:05 PM EDT
        Fair Use isn't a right - Authored by: tknarr on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 08:01 PM EDT
        Right To Profit {- prove I said that - with specificity please - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 16 2012 @ 06:41 PM EDT
    - That's one perspective - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 06:07 PM EDT
      - That's one perspective - Authored by: tknarr on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 06:33 PM EDT
- Not just books - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 14 2012 @ 10:06 PM EDT

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )