U.S. Supreme Court Allows Wily Gray-Market Imports

by Akerman LLP
Contact

The U.S. Supreme Court has settled the long-open question of whether U.S. copyright holders can prevent the importation of gray market products in Tuesday's decision Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 568 U.S. _____, No. 11-697, 2013 WL 1104736 (Mar. 19, 2013). In a 6-3 decision, the Court held that U.S. copyright owners may not stop the importation and re-selling of copyrighted content lawfully sold abroad. The decision has far-reaching implications for consumers, and a host of industries.

The case turned on Section 109(a) of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 109(a), which codifies the “first sale doctrine.” The first-sale doctrine recognizes that a copyright owner should not be permitted to exercise perpetual control over the distribution of copies of a copyrighted work. The copyright owner's exclusive right to distribute and sell that particular copy is therefore exhausted at the time of the first commercial sale. Used books can be resold at garage sales without running afoul of the Copyright Act because of the first-sale doctrine.

The countervailing provision of the Copyright Act is Section 602(a)(1), which provides that importation into the United States, without the authority of the copyright owner, of copies of a work that have been acquired outside the United States is an infringement.

The defendant in this case was Supap Kirtsaeng, a Thai student studying in the United States. Mr. Kirtsaeng noticed that some of his textbooks were essentially identical to those sold for considerably less money back home in Thailand. Seeing an opportunity, he asked his friends and family to send him textbooks from Thailand, for him to sell in the United States for a profit. All in all, Mr. Kirtsaeng sold several hundred thousand dollars' worth of textbooks imported this way. Eventually, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (“Wiley”), a publisher of certain of the books Mr. Kirtsaeng imported and sold, sued for copyright infringement. The district court found for Wiley and imposed statutory damages of $600,000. The Second Circuit affirmed.

This subject has closely divided the Supreme Court for years. In Quality King Distributors, Inc. v. L'anza Research Int'l, Inc., 523 U.S. 135 (1998), the Court's opinion contained strong dicta suggesting that the first-sale doctrine would not protect a gray market importer of copyrighted goods. Id. At 148.  More recently, in Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Omega, S.A., 131 S. Ct. 565 (2010), an equally divided Supreme Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit's holding that the first sale doctrine applies only to copyrighted items that are made and distributed in the United States. However, the Court's order in Costco established no precedent.  
 
The Court's analysis in Kirtsaeng focused on the meaning text of Section 109(a), which provides that the owner of a particular copy of a work “lawfully made under this title” is entitled to sell that copy. Wiley argued that its books, which were printed abroad and intended solely for foreign sale, were not works “lawfully made under this title.” Wiley argued that the proper interpretation of “lawfully made under this title” should be “in conformance with the Copyright Act where the Copyright Act is applicable.” Thus, argued Wiley, the books, which were printed abroad and intended solely for foreign sale, were not works “lawfully made under this title.” Mr. Kirtsaeng, on the other hand, argued that the books were lawfully made, because they were lawfully made under license from Wiley, albeit for foreign markets.

Justice Breyer's opinion accepted Mr. Kirtsaeng's argument noting several reasons for doing so. First, the language of Section 109(a) plainly contains no geographic limitations. Second, the Court found that historical and contemporary context indicated that Congress intended no geographic limitation to Section 109(a). Third, the Court noted that, under common law, the first-sale doctrine contained no geographic limitations. As a matter of statutory interpretation, when a statute covers an issue previously governed by the common law, it is presumed that Congress intended to retain the substance of the common law. The Court's opinion disposed of the importation ban contained in Section 602(a)(1) by saying that it exists subject to the first-sale doctrine.

What was possibly the most important factor in the Court's decision was the concern about enforcing a prohibition against the sale of lawfully made goods that are obtained from abroad. At the oral argument, Justice Breyer noted the folly of thinking that libraries must obtain licenses to allow the lending of books printed overseas, or that owners of foreign-made telephones, computers, and tablets must obtain consent from software publishers to resell them. The Court's opinion lists the concerns of the American Library Association, used book dealers, the Retail Litigation Center, the Association of Art Museum Directors, among others, at length. A dramatic change in the first-sale doctrine would require these institutions or businesses to engage in a complex permission-verifying process because the copyright owner would be permitted to exercise downstream control over its copyrighted products even where it authorized the import or first sale.

Justices Ginsburg, Scalia and Kennedy dissented from the Court’s decision. Writing for the three, Justice Ginsburg wrote that the majority opinion was ignoring an explicit goal of the Copyright Act, namely, “to protect copyright owners against the unauthorized importation of low-priced, foreign-made copies of their copyrighted works.” The dissenting justices sought to protect market differentiation, allowing copyright holders to treat domestic and foreign markets differently. Thus, the dissenting justices held that since the Copyright Act does not apply outside the United States, goods made outside the United States are not “lawfully made under this title.” The dissent criticized the majority opinion for rendering the importation-ban of Section 602(a)(1) all but completely superfluous.

Finally, the concurring opinion of Justices Kagan and Alito invited Congress to change the law if it thinks that copyright holders need more protection against gray market importations.

Kirtsaeng and its predecessors seek to balance the needs of consumers who may purchase something abroad and later resell it in the United States, and who cannot reasonably be held liable for copyright infringement, with the need of copyright holders' right to differentiate among markets and their various local demands. The U.S. Supreme Court resolved the balancing test in favor of consumers – finding that the needs of the consumers outweighed the needs of the copyright holders. U.S. copyright holders will need to use other methods – such as contractual limitations – to prevent the importation of copies of copyrighted works that are lawfully made abroad, as they can no longer rely upon importation being a potential infringement under U.S. copyright law. However, regardless of the contractual limitations placed on manufacturers or distributors, once the first sale occurs, the copyright holder’s distribution rights will be exhausted and it will no longer have control over the further distribution and sale of the copyrighted product under the Copyright Act. Some commentators have already criticized the Kirtsaeng decision, claiming that without the ability to control the copies of its copyrighted works that are distributed in domestic and foreign markets, U.S. copyright holders will merely offer goods on an all-or-nothing basis, without competitive pricing, and in limited markets.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Akerman LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Akerman LLP
Contact
more
less

Akerman LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!