This post is an update on: "SCOTUS To Hear Case Against "First Sale Doctrine" Oct. 29, 2012 - Bye Bye Personal Property? And The 666 10-12-12 "'...if you buy a CD or a book...it is now yours to use, throw away, or resell right? ....this fall the US Supreme Court is considering a case that could change that....meaning that you could not resell products that you buy without permission first' - Slaves can own no property, they are themselves owned. In the Luciferian Cabalistic-Zionist new-world-order now materializing on this planet [here], if you are not one of 'them'...you will be one of 'those' (slave)...It is definitely noteworthy how taking away to any degree the "right to resell" could go a long way in laying the groundwork for the biblical 666 scenario where no man may buy or sell without the mark...We shall see just how far they go...be watching. Luke 21:36" [see post, video]
***
Supreme Court Will Decide If You Actually Own What You've Bought tech dirt.com
from the yes,-it's-come-to-this dept
While everything else in DC closed down to bunker down for Hurricane Sandy, the Supreme Court Justices decided to soldier on and actually hear the case today. Joe Mullin has written up the most thorough and detailed examination of the case, including the fact that Kirsaeng is merely the first, and most well-known case brought by copyright holders trying to stop them from reselling legally purchased works made outside the US.
Copyright holders keep trying to downplay the "horror story" scenarios that many of us worried about a ruling in favor of Wiley could lead to. However, if the Supreme Court says that it's copyright infringement to sell a copyright-covered work made outside the US, but legally imported in, you can bet that all sorts of companies will seek to take advantage of this fact. We've already talked about the predecessor case here, Omega v. Costco, in which merely putting a copyright image that no one would see on the back of a watch could open up the ability to block resale of physical products. While Omega eventually got smacked down in the lower court, that was for copyright misuse -- the first sale issue stuck. So, all companies need to do is slightly modify the way they use copyright, and they can ban your ability to resell products.
...this issue is going to matter in Congress eventually. Whichever side loses this case is going to run to Congress with pre-written legislation to "fix" the Court's ruling.
If you believe in basic property rights, this should freak you out...If you believe that you should own what you bought -- even if it's made in a foreign country -- then this is a case to pay attention to.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As mentioned in the above article, this one is not going away. The NWO slave-traders intent to strip ownership of personal property is clear. Now that the door is open with this case, whatever SCOTUS does at this juncture will just be a step along the path toward that end goal. With other cases pending, Congress getting involved, the corporate world behind it, the rest is a cart and pony show until the 'paradigm' is 'shifted'. Brave New World or bust is the kabbalist mindset. Be aware. Rev. 18:4
***
see also: 'First Sale Doctrine' Update: LA Outlaws Cash Purchase of Second Hand Goods 10-22-12
follow links, connect dots; fyi
***
Supreme Court Will Decide If You Actually Own What You've Bought tech dirt.com
from the yes,-it's-come-to-this dept
While everything else in DC closed down to bunker down for Hurricane Sandy, the Supreme Court Justices decided to soldier on and actually hear the case today. Joe Mullin has written up the most thorough and detailed examination of the case, including the fact that Kirsaeng is merely the first, and most well-known case brought by copyright holders trying to stop them from reselling legally purchased works made outside the US.
Copyright holders keep trying to downplay the "horror story" scenarios that many of us worried about a ruling in favor of Wiley could lead to. However, if the Supreme Court says that it's copyright infringement to sell a copyright-covered work made outside the US, but legally imported in, you can bet that all sorts of companies will seek to take advantage of this fact. We've already talked about the predecessor case here, Omega v. Costco, in which merely putting a copyright image that no one would see on the back of a watch could open up the ability to block resale of physical products. While Omega eventually got smacked down in the lower court, that was for copyright misuse -- the first sale issue stuck. So, all companies need to do is slightly modify the way they use copyright, and they can ban your ability to resell products.
...this issue is going to matter in Congress eventually. Whichever side loses this case is going to run to Congress with pre-written legislation to "fix" the Court's ruling.
If you believe in basic property rights, this should freak you out...If you believe that you should own what you bought -- even if it's made in a foreign country -- then this is a case to pay attention to.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As mentioned in the above article, this one is not going away. The NWO slave-traders intent to strip ownership of personal property is clear. Now that the door is open with this case, whatever SCOTUS does at this juncture will just be a step along the path toward that end goal. With other cases pending, Congress getting involved, the corporate world behind it, the rest is a cart and pony show until the 'paradigm' is 'shifted'. Brave New World or bust is the kabbalist mindset. Be aware. Rev. 18:4
***
see also: 'First Sale Doctrine' Update: LA Outlaws Cash Purchase of Second Hand Goods 10-22-12
follow links, connect dots; fyi
1 comment :
Especially since almost everything is made in a foreign country . . .
When we declared bankruptcy and closed our business, we were informed that we would still be taxed each year for any equipment we had not been able to liquidate (county business property/equipment tax). Paid sales tax to buy it, paid tax on profits, payroll, business licenses, and still taxed after we were out of business. Horrible.
Post a Comment