Supreme Court To Decide Whether Or Not You Own What You Own

Jafafa Hots writes "The Supreme Court is set to decide, in the case of Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, whether or not First Sale Doctrine applies to products made with parts sourced from outside the United States. If the Supreme Court upholds an appellate ruling, it would mean that the IP holders of anything you own that has been made in China, Japan or Europe, for example, would have to give you permission to sell it. Your old used CDs, cell phone, books, or that Ford truck with foreign parts? It may not be yours to sell unless you get explicit permission and presumably pay royalties. 'It would be absurd to say anything manufactured abroad can't be bought or sold here,' said Marvin Ammori, a First Amendment lawyer and Schwartz Fellow at the New American Foundation who specializes in technology issues."

Comments

The Supreme Court of the Republican Party

[Required Snark]

It's not the Supreme Court of the United States, it's the Supreme Court of the Republican Party. Specifically the far right Republicans. If you have any doubts, just remember how Bush was appointed President in his first term.

None of this is off the record. It's all been reported. The news media has a combination of self censorship and ignoring the "boring" stuff. This is why it's never reported, and why this is a big surprise on Slashdot.

Here is what Scalia just said to the American Enterprise Institute on Oct. 5th, just last week. http://www.businessinsider.com/scalia-says-homosexual-sodomy-was-criminal-2012-10 Oct 5, 2012

Justice Antonin Scalia has already called questions about the death penalty "laughable," saying if it was a law when the country was founded, then it's a law now.

And now the "originalist" is attacking homosexual behavior in the same breath as abortion and opposition to the death penalty.

During a speech at the American Enterprise Institute, Scalia said he disagrees with colleagues who now believe the death penalty is unconstitutional, the AP reported.

He then seemed to suggest that he didn't think homosexual activity was protected by the Constitution, either.

"The death penalty? Give me a break. It's easy ... Homosexual sodomy? Come on. For 200 years, it was criminal in every state," Scalia said.

To quote the friend who sent this to me:

When the country was founded slavery was legal, adult women were legally and socially considered minors and one step above chattel, child labor was legal, "buggery" was punished by death, indentured servitude was legal, conscription into the armed forces was legal, genocide against Native Americans was legal (and enthusiastically pursued), and I could go on and on.

So how do you think Scalia will vote? The accepted current rights of the consumer, or some radical approach that will put more money and power in the hands of corrupt business interests? If you take him at his word, he would be happy to re-instate indentured servitude. What were the state of consumer rights 200 years ago? Still want to make a bet?

He claims to be an "originalist", but in fact his is a extreme radical. He's proud of this position, and makes speeches link this all the time. And it rarely makes the main stream headlines.

I expect that all the righty trolls will be making excuses for Scalia and the American Enterprise Institute. His idea of freedom, and the AEI idea of freedom, is that you STFU and do what your masters tell to to do. How bad does it have to get so that even the Slashdot nerds wake up and realize that the right wing want to turn them into peasants?

Re:Might be incentive to buy American?

[EasyTarget]

So.. let me get this right. An object with no other purpose than killing things is NOT a weapon.
Wow, you really set me straight there, we silly dizzy Europeans are just so dumb.