Important Supreme Court Case on Monday

by Hortensia 28 Replies latest social entertainment

• 

  Hortensia

  http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/a-supreme-court-clash-could-change-what-ownership-means/

  Could bring down Ebay, and the selling of used books on Amazon, and reselling goods on other sites. Book publishers who sell their textbooks for astronomical prices in the U.S. but much cheaper in other countries are suing entrepreneurs who import the cheaper but identical books and sell them for less.

  At issue is whether you own the stuff you buy. The book publishers want to prevent resales, because they "lose" money they think they could grab if reselling is forbidden. A textbook publisher I write for usually pays me for my writing but also sends me a case of the books when published, each book marked in large letters "not for resale!" What the hell am I supposed to do with an entire case of books I don't need and can't sell? It seems to me that if I give them away, the publishing company loses out anyway, because that's a few more people not buying their book.
• 

  cofty

  Interesting, please let us know if you hear how the case goes.
• 

  Hortensia

  the motion picture industry and the music industry are of course supporting the textbook publisher who is suing. Amazon, Ebay, Craigslist, Goodwill, Overstock and similar companies are supporting the poor schmuck the book publisher is suing.
• 

  Farkel

  I'm familiar with the case and it boils down to this: if you buy a thing, do you own it, or does the entity that produced it own it?

  In my simple brain, I own it and since I own it, I can do whatever I want after I own it. I can give it away, I can sell it for 5 cents or I can sell it for 5 billion dollars if I have a buyer who will pay it.

  That is the argument as I understand it. The creators of intellelctual property are rewarded for their efforts at point-of-sale. They get money. The customer gets a product. Should not the customer then have total control over that particular product they paid for? I don't mean they should be allowed to copy it and then sell the copies, I am just talking about the "it" they bought.

  Did I miss something, some other nuance perhaps?

  Farkel
• 

  NewChapter

  ill be watching this. textbooks are outrageous for something i use for 16 weeks and i always try to buy them used and then resell them or donate to a needier student if ican find them. sometimes they are almost as much as the class and profs really encourage us to shop on line.
• 

  Hortensia

  Farkel, you're right as far as I understand the issue.

  I'm familiar with the case and it boils down to this: if you buy a thing, do you own it, or does the entity that produced it own it?

  I make some walking around change by reselling used books online. I sell books on a regular basis, but on a fairly small scale. I really think that's part of the economy - publisher sells to bookseller and bookseller sells to us. Then it moves around the economy, sold at a garage sale, resold at the local used book store, sold online, passed on through several hands. I don't see anything wrong with it.

  What if computer manufacturers refused to let you sell your used laptop because there is copyrighted material on the laptop? Nonsense.
• 

  Hortensia

  darn, can't edit the post. I meant to put your statement in a quote box.
• 

  Hortensia

  Also, instead of being so greedy for more cash, maybe the publishers should consider not charging so much for books in the U.S. so people aren't tempted to buy their textbooks overseas.

  It costs a lot to put out a textbook. But not THAT much. Textbooks in the U.S. regularly cost more than $100, which is ridiculous.
• 

  Band on the Run

  Is this similar to iTunes where you never actually purchase the song but purchase a mere license to a song. A license that is hard to transfer.

  I want to run for elective office on a consumer protection platform. It takes me hours on the phone or a written letter to the CEO to find out what basic charges are for? There is no itemized list, only a total owed. The company has about twenty ways to give them money not zero option to find out what the charges are for or to make a valid legal claim that you owe no money or only a partial sum of the money.

  A few years ago, I could spend only 45 minutes to conduct a routine inquiry. Now it runs to at least 1 1/2 hours. I know some tricks. The company is counting on exhausting consumers so they are too fed up to enforce their rights. It is not illegal. What annoys me to the hilt, though, is what the Attorney-Generals are doing. Major companies have no option on their automated system to speak to an actual rep or to dispute a charge. Companies are for profit entities. Why do public officials allow this to exist without more regulation?

  If you knew the legal services available for large corporations compared to an individual, you would be ill.

  When I was younger, I worried about foreign policy, then domestic. In my senior years, I just want basic customer service. Sorry for rant.
• 

  yknot

  Such a sad state of affairs....

  This is why sites like library pirate (textbooks) are getting more traffic ...

  These days the textbook companies still make money when a publisher site is used as part of the class with an average of $75-$100 access fee (free with full price book purchase).