US Supreme Court to hear copyright first sale case

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

US Supreme Court to hear copyright first sale case

supremecourtjustices45.jpg

The US Supreme Court is due to hear arguments in Supap Kirtsaeng v John Wiley & Sons, a case that addresses whether copyrighted goods manufactured and purchased abroad are subject to the first sale doctrine, today

The Court tackled the same issue in late 2010, when it considered Costco v. Omega. That case involved a copyrighted globe design on Omega watches manufactured in Switzerland and then sold to a distributor in Paraguay. The distributors then sold them to an American supplier, who sold the watches to Costco, a US discount store.

supremecourtjustices300.jpg

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals favoured Costco when it reversed a district court decision in 2008, and in December 2010 the Supreme Court delivered a 4-4 ruling, leaving many open questions.

In the Kirtsaeng case, Supap Kirtsaeng arranged for his family in Thailand to buy cheaper editions of textbooks printed there by Wiley & Sons. They then shipped them to him in the U.S., where he resold them for a profit on websites such as eBay.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the so-called first sale doctrine—which says that once a copyright owner sells a work, his rights in that work are exhausted—does not apply to copies manufactured outside of the United States, thereby making Kirtsaeng liable for copyright infringement. Kirtsaeng appealed to the Supreme Court, asking it to consider these questions:

Can such a foreign-made product never be resold within the United States without the copyright owner’s permission, as the Second Circuit held in this case? Can such a foreign-made product sometimes be resold within the United States without permission, but only after the owner approves an earlier sale in this country, as the Ninth Circuit held in Costco? Or can such a product always be resold without permission within the United States, so long as the copyright owner authorized the first sale abroad, as the Third Circuit has indicated?

AIPLA has filed an amicus brief in support of John Wiley & Sons. The Association argues that the first sale defense may not be raised, not because the books were made abroad, but because under the extraterritoriality doctrine the first sale right attaches only after the copyright owner has made its first sale in the United States.

Download the AIPLA Daily Report, published by Managing IP from Washington, DC from our conference newspapers page .

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Penelope Aspinall, of wellbeing charity Jonathan’s Voice, explains why a newly published mental health hub for the IP community could prove to be a vital resource
The dispute, which centres on the patentability of a computer program, has seen multiple twists and turns
Paul Hastings said the hire of litigator Alex Morgan underscores the firm’s commitment to strengthening its London-based IP team
The Unified Patent Court’s first FRAND judgment, a patent blow for Samsung, and a new design law treaty were among the top IP stories this week
Leaders at Morgan Lewis discuss the firm’s bold ambitions for Europe and why it feels it can offer a boutique experience within a full-service setting
Firms in Canada explain how they’ve adapted to a rule change in 2017 that has made advocacy skills more important in pharma disputes
Leaders at some IP businesses are looking to consolidate the fragmented market and, considering the benefits, their rivals may want to follow suit
Counsel at three US firms explain how they are expanding their UPC teams or if they are looking to partner with European firms
Lucy Wheatley, partner at McGuireWoods, discusses the challenges of explaining trademarks to a jury and reveals a logistical hurdle she had to navigate
Law firms avoid strategy rethink after district court ‘reaffirms the value’ of a strong trademark
Gift this article