Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals

[Hyman Rosen]

On 12/21/2010 11:16 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> The US courts disagree with you Hyman.

No, they do not.

> http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/550/550.F2d.1180.76-1141.html
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    March 28, 1977.
    ...
    While the copyright laws protect the right of the copyright proprietor
    to vend his work, that right is not absolute, but is subject to the
    "first sale doctrine" as stated in 17 U.S.C. § 27. That statute provides
    in pertinent part:
        "(B)ut nothing in this title shall be deemed to forbid, prevent,
         or restrict the transfer of any copy of a copyrighted work the
         possession of which has been lawfully obtained."

17 USC 27 is no longer the law; the Copyright Act of 1976 went into effect
on January 1, 1978, after the above ruling, and the first sale doctrine now
reads differently. Rather than allowing resale of works "lawfully obtained"
17 USC 109 allows resale of works "lawfully made under this title" and that
is an entirely different kettle of fish, as Omega vs. Costco demonstrated.
A copy made for personal use but then distributed has not been lawfully made.