General Discussion Forum

Topic: If You've Ever Sold a Used Nintendo Device, You May Have Violated Upcoming United States Copyright Law

Showing 21 to 40 of 57

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Wheels2050

21. Posted:

@tbd: my understanding is that it applies to anything that is copyrighted by an overseas company, even if it was sold in the US like normal.

I used to have a blog link here. I'll put it back up when the blog has something to read.

AuthorMessage
AvatarAdmin

theblackdragon

22. Posted:

@Wheels2050: What I got from the article was that it concerned devices that had been copyrighted and authorized for sale overseas only. For example, my copy of Ouendan 2 says "For sale and use in Japan only. Commercial use unauthorized, copy and rental prohibited." There are plenty of devices and products that are printed with such language (in fact, all of my NA-purchased DS titles say they're for sale and use in the US, Canada, Mexico, and Latin America only), produced and made for sale only in certain regions. The textbooks and watches cited as examples in the article would have fallen under that guideline easily as they were made for sale and purchase in another country, they were brought to the US, and then they were sold by others in competition with the same exact product that the company was attempting to sell in the US. They made those products and specifically designated them for sale someplace else in the world; that's how the article came across to me when I read it.

BEST THREAD EVER
future of NL >:3
[16:43] James: I should learn these site rules more clearly
[16:44] LztheBlehBird: James doesn't know the rules? For shame!!!
[16:44] Vintage: We have rules?
[16:44] Reala: don't expose the staff to sunlight, don't get them wet and don't feed them after midnight

3DS Friend Code: 3136-6802-7042 | Nintendo Network ID: gentlemen_cat | Twitter: theblackdragon

AuthorMessage
Avatar

CanisWolfred

23. Posted:

^It's not clear, actually. One court said "It's only for copyrighted material made for sale overseas" while another said it's for "any copyrighted material that was made overseas". I think it's actually the latter being dealt with by the Supreme Court, but I'd have to double check.

EDIT: "Continuing a long string of similar cases, the Supreme Court will review a New York federal court decision that decided, in short, that the first-sale doctrine does not apply to any copyrighted product manufactured abroad."

That's straight from the article the OP gave us. I'll look up another article to make sure it's not bad reporting.

EDIT 2: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/04/us-supreme-court-t...
http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-10-12/finance/34240922_1...
http://www.natlawreview.com/article/supreme-court-to-decide-a...

Most of these say the same thing, though the last one is the best read. However, that may just be people parroting, since the case they're dealing with involves textbooks that weren't meant for U.S. sale, so I can see where you're coming from, TBD. If the Supreme Court doesn't just throw it out, I think they may just apply it to copyrighted material not meant for U.S. distribution. I still hope they don't, though. I get most of my imports used...

Edited on by CanisWolfred

Doesn't talk about games.

Avid Fan of Anime, Webcomics, and Wolves
My Den - My door is always open....Too bad it's an empty closet.
My DeviantArt - I like to call it "the blank wall"

Wolfrun
Wolfrun Chibi

Arooo~

AuthorMessage
AvatarAdmin

theblackdragon

24. Posted:

@Mickeymac: Sorry, it sounds like sensationalist parroting to me, and it doesn't quite match the cases involved, that's why i read it the way i did. those articles also aren't taking into account the fact that the cases being decided were between people purposely purchasing these goods for resale here in the US as opposed to the average joe who bought an iPad for personal use while in China and wants to get rid of it a few years later now that he's home. I can't see Apple coming down on that one person or such a suit holding water in court; there's a big difference between the potential cases.

Edited on by theblackdragon

BEST THREAD EVER
future of NL >:3
[16:43] James: I should learn these site rules more clearly
[16:44] LztheBlehBird: James doesn't know the rules? For shame!!!
[16:44] Vintage: We have rules?
[16:44] Reala: don't expose the staff to sunlight, don't get them wet and don't feed them after midnight

3DS Friend Code: 3136-6802-7042 | Nintendo Network ID: gentlemen_cat | Twitter: theblackdragon

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Wheels2050

25. Posted:

Hmm, in any case it's somewhat worrying. Granted, I'll be back in Australia soon so it may not impact me that much, but this could set an unfortunate precedent.

I'm not normally one to bang on about people's eroding rights, but this has the potential to be quite bad (from my admittedly limited understanding of the situation). I thought that the first sale doctrine was a basic tenet of copyright law, and I think it's a good one. Once you've bought something, it should be yours to do with as you wish (as long as you're not breaking any other laws by doing so), with some exceptions for certain classes of goods.

I digress a bit, but this has become a bit of a problem with copyright law. Even 10 years ago there was a court case in Australia regarding copy protection for some sort of digital media (I think it was music, but I can't be sure). The case was regarding the legality of making personal backups of media, and thus concerning fair use laws. The judge made the point that, if copy protection exists (which is illegal in Australia to circumvent, I believe, or was at the time) then it causes problems down the track. Once the copyright licence on the media (say, the songs, if it was a music CD) has expired, copyright law says it then enters the public domain and can be freely distributed. However, to do so, one first has to circumvent the copy protection, which would still be illegal.

Thus, in practice, one COULD legally distribute the copyrighted material once that copyright has expired, but to do so one first has to break a different law regarding copy protection.

Long story short, it seems - from my completely uneducated, in legal terms, point of view - that technology and the ease of importing goods these days are proceeding far too quickly for copyright law to keep up.

I used to have a blog link here. I'll put it back up when the blog has something to read.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

The_Fox

26. Posted:

TheDreamingHawk wrote:

Yeah, ain't gonna happen. Unless it says NOT FOR RESALE on the box, you can sell it.

You can still sell it even if it does say that. Courts have held that the First Sale Doctrine trumps a company stamping that on a package. That applies to hardware, anyway. Software is a bit murkier.

Edited on by The_Fox

"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

-President John Adams

Treaty of Tripoly, article 11

AuthorMessage
Avatar

ogo79

27. Posted:

right when i was just about to import an italian toilet!

the_shpydar wrote:
As @ogo79 said, the SNS-RZ-USA is a prime giveaway that it's not a legit retail cart.
And yes, he is (usually) always right, and he is (almost) the sexiest gamer out there (not counting me) ;)

AuthorMessage
Avatar

JusticeColde

28. Posted:

@theblackdragon So I can still buy a Sega Genesis if this passes?
I'm completely lost on this.

Entertainment, today.
300 games and counting
Follow for... eh.

Nintendo Network ID: JusticeColde | Twitter: JusticeColde

AuthorMessage
Avatar

True_Hero

29. Posted:

Well, in my opinion, if you don't understand exactly what a law or reform is going to do, don't support it.

-The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is. ~Winston Churchill

3DS Friend Code: 1805-2247-0273 | Nintendo Network ID: True_Hero

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Lunapplebloom

30. Posted:

All I can say on this matter is that it's a stupid move by the government if this thing passes. As @theblackdragon says, It will just be hurting imported sales.

Like: Sonic, Yoshi, Link, and Samus
My Appleloggery and Youtube
PSN ID: sonicwildfire
Previously Applejacklove
Discostew: "I am the terror that trots in the night! I am the gleam of the moon that blinds you while you drive! I - am Gamer Luna!"
Applebloom is best CMC!

3DS Friend Code: 3737-9557-7319 | Nintendo Network ID: sonicwildfire07

AuthorMessage
Avatar

TheDreamingHawk

31. Posted:

Still ain't gonna happen. If we couldn't buy old antiques from the old days, that could also cause problems with archeologists.

A Supporter of Reggie Fils-Aime and Respectful opinions
Pokemon black 2 FC: 1808 0259 1596

3DS Friend Code: 4725-7951-6337 | Nintendo Network ID: TheDreaminHawk

AuthorMessage
Avatar

ogo79

32. Posted:

just caught a class a felony for italian toilet importing.
see yall in 30 years.

the_shpydar wrote:
As @ogo79 said, the SNS-RZ-USA is a prime giveaway that it's not a legit retail cart.
And yes, he is (usually) always right, and he is (almost) the sexiest gamer out there (not counting me) ;)

AuthorMessage
AvatarAdmin

theblackdragon

33. Posted:

@ogo: hey, since you're in the clink an' all, can i use your toilet? it sounds fancy :3

BEST THREAD EVER
future of NL >:3
[16:43] James: I should learn these site rules more clearly
[16:44] LztheBlehBird: James doesn't know the rules? For shame!!!
[16:44] Vintage: We have rules?
[16:44] Reala: don't expose the staff to sunlight, don't get them wet and don't feed them after midnight

3DS Friend Code: 3136-6802-7042 | Nintendo Network ID: gentlemen_cat | Twitter: theblackdragon

AuthorMessage
Avatar

WildMan

34. Posted:

ogo79 wrote:

just caught a class a felony for italian toilet importing.
see yall in 30 years.

+1

Mmm Chicken

3DS Friend Code: 1075-1253-2852

AuthorMessage
Avatar

ogo79

35. Posted:

theblackdragon wrote:

@ogo: hey, since you're in the clink an' all, can i use your toilet? it sounds fancy :3

you camped out in my ice box, and took my sugar wafers but my fancy toilet? who do you think yo...
er...okay no problem

the_shpydar wrote:
As @ogo79 said, the SNS-RZ-USA is a prime giveaway that it's not a legit retail cart.
And yes, he is (usually) always right, and he is (almost) the sexiest gamer out there (not counting me) ;)

AuthorMessage
Avatar

GreenDream

36. Posted:

"Both the District and Second Circuit courts held that any product manufactured abroad is not subject to the first-sale doctrine."

A description of the still-used first sale doctrine: http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/titl... The only exception to date is rental services.

"The Supreme Court’s decision will impact the domestic and international availability of copyrighted products. The outcome will affect the applicability of the Act to foreign-made goods imported and distributed within the U.S."

Here's the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit case, Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (11-697).

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/11-697

"Kirtsaeng sold these textbooks on commercial websites such as eBay.com and used the profits to reimburse his family and to pay for his education. According to testimony from Kirtsaeng during the jury trial, he earned $900,000 in revenues from the textbook sales."

This person found a loophole, and exploited it. The suing company didn't like that, so they went after him.

The significance of all of this tieing together, though...

"Proponents of Kirtsaeng’s argument state that Wiley’s interpretation would give rise to a chilling effect on the operations of public institutions and charitable organizations. For example, Goodwill argues that the first-sale doctrine sustains the secondary goods market because it allows resellers to sell goods at cheap prices without worrying about copyright infringement. If Wiley’s interpretation is upheld, Goodwill and its customers will be burdened with the task of investigating the origins of their goods, leading to a decrease of the benefits of Goodwill’s operations. Others contend that if § 109(a) were interpreted so that the first-sale doctrine applies only to products manufactured in the U.S., then museums, galleries, and libraries will have difficulty exhibiting foreign art or lending international materials because these institutions will have to obtain copyright licenses, which require extensive negotiations.

Opponents of Kirtsaeng’s argument contend that limiting the applicability of the first-sale doctrine to domestically manufactured goods would not inhibit the availability of foreign artworks or other cultural materials in the U.S. They argue that Wiley’s interpretation still allows for importation and distribution of foreign goods as long as the distributor obtains the copyright owner’s permission. If and when the copyright owner authorizes the importation and sale of the goods IN THE U.S., only then will the first-sale doctrine apply, and the copyright owner will no longer hold exclusive rights to distribute the imported goods."

Edited on by GreenDream

3DS Friend Code: Jade2012, 5241-1951-1094

When the cat meows at you, you don't understand. But when you meow at the cat, the cat meows back!

AuthorMessage
Avatar

GreenDream

37. Posted:

This does not just apply to one product, it could be extended to apply to ANY product. It DOES apply to ANY sales within the United States. If the Supreme Court passes this, then a major precedent will be set that companies / corporations control ALL aspects of the sales of ANY of their goods not manufactured SOLELY in the United States. The end user forfeits any and ALL rights of ownership of the bought product to the whims of the company or corporation.

Most game products are manufactured in Eastern Asia, therefore, if not in this case, then possibly in the future, the definition could be extended to include ANYTHING not 100% produced in the United States, but is sold in the United States under a copyright and / or trademark.

Edited on by GreenDream

3DS Friend Code: Jade2012, 5241-1951-1094

When the cat meows at you, you don't understand. But when you meow at the cat, the cat meows back!

AuthorMessage
Avatar

GreenDream

38. Posted:

TheDreamingHawk wrote:

If we couldn't buy old antiques from the old days, that could also cause problems with archeologists.

That's exactly one of the points being made. Without "extensive negotiations", museums would, from now on, be completely at the mercy of whichever company or corporation laid claim to any item to bid for procurement, IN ADDITION to existing processes. A company or corporation could acquire a copyright and / or trademark at will- then no matter where a museum piece goes, it belongs to the company or corporation in full.

The ones who originally crafted, found, or otherwise acquired the items would lose ALL legal ownership of their own works, unless the company / corporation bid otherwise.

Edited on by GreenDream

3DS Friend Code: Jade2012, 5241-1951-1094

When the cat meows at you, you don't understand. But when you meow at the cat, the cat meows back!

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Geonjaha

39. Posted:

You cant violate copyright laws that havent been implemented yet.

I make Pixel Art on occasion.

3DS Friend Code: 2277-6645-7215

AuthorMessage
AvatarAdmin

theblackdragon

40. Posted:

Please, GreenDream, I understand you're upset, but we only need one topic for this. Let's keep the discussion to this one. Thanks in advance!

BEST THREAD EVER
future of NL >:3
[16:43] James: I should learn these site rules more clearly
[16:44] LztheBlehBird: James doesn't know the rules? For shame!!!
[16:44] Vintage: We have rules?
[16:44] Reala: don't expose the staff to sunlight, don't get them wet and don't feed them after midnight

3DS Friend Code: 3136-6802-7042 | Nintendo Network ID: gentlemen_cat | Twitter: theblackdragon