Tag Archives: Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Understanding the Supreme Court First Sale Decision

Read the ArticleIn The Impact of the Supreme Court’s Decision in Kirtsaeng v. Wiley on Libraries (pdf), Jonathan Band explains the recent landmark copyright decision on the scope of the “first sale” doctrine, its context, and its likely consequences for libraries in the US.

In short, the Supreme Court’s opinion is a landmark victory that strengthens the legal foundation of library lending, and the Court’s extensive reliance on the Library Copyright Alliance’s amicus brief shows the importance of library engagement in policy debates.

Continued vigilance will be necessary, Band explains, as rights holders disappointed with the Court’s majority opinion could go to Congress for a change to the law. Jonathan Band is counsel to the Library Copyright Alliance, whose members are the American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries, and the Association of Research Libraries. Band practices law at Policybandwidth, LLC.

About Carrie Russell

Carrie Russell is the director for OITP's Program on Public Access to Information. Since 1999, Carrie has developed copyright education programs and related services to help ALA members understand the latest trends regarding copyright law and its impact on libraries.

Today: Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Libraries, Consumer Rights

lcaimageToday, the U.S. Supreme Court supported consumer rights and libraries in the high-profile Kirtsaeng v. Wiley & Sons, Inc. case by ruling that goods lawfully made overseas are protected by the first sale doctrine. The Kirtsaeng case focused on whether Americans and businesses had the right to sell, lend, or give away the things they own that were made overseas.

The case centered on a graduate student, Supap Kirtsaeng, who bought textbooks published by John Wiley & Sons in Thailand and sold them online in the United States. Kirtsaeng was sued by the book publisher, who claimed that the right of first sale did not apply because the books were manufactured overseas.

The court case ruling could have greatly affected libraries, as the first sale doctrine allows libraries to lend books and other materials to the public. With this decision, the Court upheld the rights of libraries to loan materials lawfully to their patrons regardless of where those materials have been manufactured.

“We welcome the Court’s clear ruling in favor of the first sale doctrine,” said Maureen Sullivan, president of the American Library Association (ALA). “The ALA will continue to fight for Americans’ right to access information.”

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer mentioned the American Library Association in his opinion (pdf) on the case.

“The American Library Association tells us that library collections contain at least 200 million books published abroad,” said Justice Breyer. “How, the American Library Association asks, are the libraries to obtain permission to distribute these millions of books? How can they find, say, the copyright owner of a foreign book, perhaps written decades ago? Are the libraries to stop circulating or distributing or displaying the millions of books in their collections that were printed abroad?”

In anticipation of this ruling, the ALA joined the Owners Rights Initiative (ORI), a broad coalition of companies and other organizations who advocate and lobby to preserve the first sale doctrine. ALA will continue to work with ORI should any legislative action be taken against first sale under the principle that when we buy it, we can lend it.

Today, ALA with the Library Copyright Alliance, applauding the decision of the Supreme Court jointly released a statement (pdf).

About Jazzy Wright

Jazzy Wright is the Press Officer of the American Library Association's Washington Office. Email her at jwright@alawash.org.

Could the Supreme Court outlaw your library’s right to lend?

A man checks out a book from a libraryAny day now, the Supreme Court will make a ruling on Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.  It is an important case for libraries, which could determine the future of the first sale doctrine, but most librarians probably know nothing about it.  This is why I am writing this post, and deliberately choosing to discuss it in simple terms to put the main issues we should be concerned about in clear terms.  Those who want greater detail have many other places to look.

Briefly, in Kirtsaeng, a graduate student enrolled at a university in the United States purchased textbooks in his home country of Thailand where the books were sold at a lower price than in the United States.  (This is not unusual.  Rights holders—those that hold the exclusive rights of copyright—will set different prices for works depending on the geographic region. There is a noticeable difference when comparing the sales price in a rich nation to a developing nation.  Rights holders understand that the people in a developing country would be unable to afford the U.S. purchase price, so they lower it. Often times the lower priced books are of a lesser quality than the higher priced books.) Kirtsaeng then sold those copies to other college students at a higher price than in Thailand, but still lower than in the United States.  He made a tidy profit.

One of the textbook publishers – Wiley and Sons – sued the student for copyright infringement.  Wiley argues that the student did not lawfully acquire the books therefore; he had no first sale right.  Much of their case rests on language in the copyright law “lawfully made under this title.” Wiley is focusing on the word “made.”  Wiley argues that there is no first sale for books manufactured overseas, even if you legitimately acquired and purchased the books.

DemandProgress, which also takes issue with Wiley and Sons position, made a great animated short that explains the case as well.

Why libraries are concerned

Libraries purchase books that are often made in other countries.  A publisher may choose to have the printing process done in another country to save costs. If you follow the logic of Wiley’s argument, this means that libraries would be unable to lend any books they purchased that were produced in another country. Therefore, no first sale for books and other copyright-protected resources manufactured overseas.

The issue being debated is first sale (§109) of the copyright law.  This is the provision that allows libraries (and other people) to lend books, sell books, share books, and dispose of books.  It is an exception to the exclusive right of distribution.  It works this way:  Rights holders have the exclusive right to distribute their creative works to the public.  This is a key way that a rights holder can make money – through the sale of copyrighted works made available to the public.  But once a person (or library) obtains a copy of the work (usually by buying it) that person can distribute that copy to others.  People say that once a rights holder makes a sale of a copy, he has “exhausted” his distribution right regarding that particular copy.  The first sale exception is extremely important public policy because it advances the dissemination of information to the public, the very purpose of the copyright law.

As a practical manner, Wiley’s position is ridiculous.  Libraries buy books that are sold in the United States but are printed in another country.  Libraries buy books from foreign publishers published and made in other countries as well, bring them back to the U.S and add them to the library collection.  Under Wiley’s theory, one would have to pay acute attention to where books and other resources are made, and sometimes this information is not readily available.  A good part of a library’s existing library collection could not leave the premises of the library building through lending.  This also would confound businesses that make money in secondary markets. Amazon would not be able to sell used books and even other second hand materials (that have copyright protection) unless they were manufactured in the United States.  Other examples advance to the extremes.   If you bought a car that includes computer software manufactured in another country, you would never be able to sell it or even give it to your daughter as a graduation gift. It could be illegal to have a garage sale if anything you are selling (with copyright protection) was made outside of the United States. And what about companies like eBay that provide a venue for the sale of used goods? What about Goodwill?

The American Library Association is a founding member of a group called Owner’s Rights Initiative (ORI) to make Congress aware of the importance of first sale.  Their motto —“you bought it, you own it.”  The Library Copyright Alliance  (LCA) of which ALA is a member, filed an amicus brief (pdf),  arguing that a ruling in favor of Wiley would be a significant blow to libraries.  Our argument and others focuses on varying interpretations of what “lawfully made under this title” means, but also discusses the obvious – a ruling in favor of Wiley would be bad public policy. As you can see, the stakes are high.

Could the Supreme Court actually rule in favor of Wiley?  It is possible.  There is another part of the copyright law (§ 602) regarding the importation of foreign works without the authorization of the rights holder, and it muddies the waters further because it seems to conflict with first sale.  The majority of the people I have talked to believe that the Supreme Court will come to the conclusion that a “middle ground” decision must be formulated, but really we don’t have a clue.

The Court is scheduled to announce court decisions after March 18th so any day now, we will learn the fate of library lending.

About Carrie Russell

Carrie Russell is the director for OITP's Program on Public Access to Information. Since 1999, Carrie has developed copyright education programs and related services to help ALA members understand the latest trends regarding copyright law and its impact on libraries.

LCA Releases First Sale Fast Facts for Libraries

Have you heard of the “first sale doctrine?” You’ve likely heard (if you’re a District Dispatch subscriber) about the Supreme Court case Kirtsaeng v. Wiley & Sons, and that it might affect library lending. However, the details of the case about a student lawfully importing textbooks into the U.S.  and then selling them on eBay are seemingly complex and technical. The Library Copyright Alliance has published a one-page summary, “First Sale Fast Facts for Libraries,” that provides you key information to understand the first sale doctrine and what is at stake in the Kirtsaeng case.

Additional information on the case is available at ALA’s First Sale Doctrine and Kirtsaeng v. Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Also, the ALA is a founding member of the Owners’ Rights Initiative, a diverse coalition of businesses, associations and organizations that have joined together to protect first sale rights in the United States.

ALA Joins Coalition to Protect Library Lending Rights

Owners' RIghts InitiativeToday, the American Library Association announced that it has joined—as a founding member—the Owners’ Rights Initiative (ORI)—a coalition of retailers, libraries, educators, Internet companies and associations working to protect ownership rights in the United States.

The coalition was formed to champion “first-sale rights,” or ownership rights, as the issue will be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Kirtsaeng vs. Wiley & Sons, Inc. on October 29, 2012. The Supreme Court’s decision could have adverse consequences for libraries and call into question libraries’ abilities to lend books and materials that were manufactured overseas.

Read the Owners’ Rights Initiative statement below to learn more about the coalition and the case:

 You Bought It, You Own It! Owners’ Rights Initiative Launches to Protect Consumers’ Rights

Coalition of businesses, associations, educators and libraries join together to protect ownership rights and global commerce

Today, a diverse coalition of retailers, libraries, educators, Internet companies and associations joined together to launch the Owners’ Rights Initiative (ORI) to protect ownership rights in the United States. ORI is committed to ensuring the right to resell genuine goods, regardless of where they were manufactured. The organization believes that this right is critical to commerce and will engage in advocacy, education and outreach on this important issue.

“The sudden erosion of ownership rights is becoming an alarming trend in the United States due to recent federal court decisions. Our position is simple: if you bought it, you own it, and you can resell it, rent it, lend it or donate it, and we believe the American people fundamentally agree. ORI will serve as a powerful voice to advocate for ownership rights while educating consumers, businesses and policymakers about this critical cause,” said ORI Executive Director Andrew Shore.

For over 100 years in the United States, if you bought something, you owned it and could resell it. Once the copyright owner makes the first sale, the right of ownership, and therefore the right to distribute, is transferred to the purchaser– a common law right referred to as the ‘first sale doctrine.’ Today, this fundamental ownership right is at issue in the Kirtsaeng vs. Wiley case, which will be argued before the Supreme Court on October 29, 2012.

The case centers on a graduate student, Supap Kirtsaeng, who bought authentic textbooks – published by John Wiley & Sons – through friends and family in Thailand and sold them online in the United States. Kirtsaeng was sued by the book publisher, who claimed that the right of first sale did not apply because the books were manufactured overseas, and he was therefore not authorized to sell the books.

“It is hard to conceive that Congress intended to incentivize manufacturers to move operations overseas, force American consumers to pay higher prices, make it hard for us to donate our own stuff to charity, and cripple the ability of libraries to lend books—without saying anything like that in the law,” said Marvin Ammori, a legal advisor to ORI and an Affiliate Scholar at Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet & Society. He explained that if the high court rules in favor of Wiley’s interpretation, “it could be illegal for American consumers and businesses to sell, lend, or give away the things they own– but only if the company happened to have manufactured the goods overseas and put a little copyrighted logo or text on them. But being able to sell your own property is a fundamental liberty recognized for centuries and a pillar of a market economy. Where a product was manufactured should be irrelevant for this fundamental right.”

ORI members are concerned that loss of basic ownership rights through a misinterpretation of copyright law could have significant, adverse consequences for global commerce and could impact consumers, small and large businesses, retailers, libraries and more. The founding members of ORI are:

  • American Free Trade Association
  • American Library Association
  • Association of Research Libraries
  • Association of Service and Computer Dealers & the North American Association of Telecommunications Dealers (AscdiNatd)
  • Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA)
  • Chegg
  • eBay Inc.
  • Goodwill Industries International, Inc.
  • Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA)
  • Impulse Technology
  • Internet Commerce Coalition
  • International Imaging Technology Council (ITC)
  • Network Hardware Resale
  • Overstock.com
  • Powell’s Books
  • Quality King Distributors, Inc.
  • Redbox
  • United Network Equipment Dealers Association (UNEDA)
  • XS International

Hillary Brill, senior global policy counsel to eBay Inc. said, “The Supreme Court now has an opportunity to protect the right of small businesses and individuals to sell legitimate goods across borders, which will benefit consumers, businesses and the overall Internet-enabled economy. At eBay, we are passionate about using technology to open world markets. Ownership rights are fundamental to commerce. They provide both opportunities for entrepreneurs and small businesses to engage in global trade and provide more options for consumers at competitive prices.”

Joseph Marion is the President of the Association of Service and Computer Dealers International and the North American Association of Telecommunications Dealers (AscdiNatd), an ORI member association representing business that sells used and refurbished telecommunications and computer equipment. Marion explained that businesses in his industry, which employs over 100,000 people in the United States, would be jeopardized if they lost the right to freely import and resell products. “This threat is very real. Manufacturers would be able to eliminate competition and control downstream distribution of products by simply moving manufacturing overseas,” Marion said.

A Supreme Court decision against Kirtsaeng would also have implications for organizations that lend copyrighted goods, including libraries and companies like Redbox, which rents movies. “Anyone who has ever borrowed books or other materials should be paying attention to this case,” said Corey Williams, associate director of government relations from the American Library Association. “Libraries rely on the protections of the first sale doctrine in order to lend books. It is critically important for the Supreme Court to recognize the impact this case could have on libraries and the public that they serve.”

The Association of Research Libraries (ARL), an ORI member, further explained the impact of the case on students and educators. “University libraries collect and preserve materials of all kinds from all over the world to support teaching, learning, and research for our students, faculty and members of the public,” Prue Adler, associate executive director of ARL said. “The materials we own and collect are held in trust for the public and for future generations.”

Alfred Paliani, President of the American Free Trade Association and General Counsel of Quality King Distributors, Inc. a large distributor of consumer products and the prevailing party in Quality King v. L’Anza, the Supreme Court decision that upheld the first sale doctrine in the context of copyrighted merchandise produced in the United States said that, “the cross-border flow of legitimate, secondary and discount goods into the United States is a critical component of free market. AFTA and Quality King have been fighting this battle for over 20 years and welcome so many strong advocates to the fight.”

Andrew Shore, executive director of ORI added, “Ownership rights are fundamental and they matter to everyone: students, educators, large companies, small businesses, anyone who has every bought a good from a retailer or wholesaler or online seller, anyone who rents books or movies, anyone who wants to resell their items online or at a yard sale or give their property away to charity. Regardless of what the Supreme Court decides in this case, we are committed to fighting for ownership rights over the long term.”

More information about ORI can be found at www.ownersrightsinitiative.org.

About Jazzy Wright

Jazzy Wright is the Press Officer of the American Library Association's Washington Office. Email her at jwright@alawash.org.