Recently in first sale Category

May 20, 2010

Gone Crafting: CDs as clock faces

ACC_Clock.jpgDear Rich: I have been trying to come up with some craft ideas to make and sell. I thought about using CDs or DVDs as clocks by adding the mechanisms and putting numbers on the faces of them. Is this illegal? Can I get in trouble for copyright infringement? No, you won't get in trouble if you're using existing CDs. As we discussed in another post, lawyers may argue as to whether the first sale doctrine covers this repurposing -- is it a derivative work? -- but we feel your CD clocks will go unhassled. You might run into problems if you were to print a celebrity's image on the CD yourself and then sell the CD. (Of course, like everything else in life, there are videos and how-to websites explaining the CD-to-clock process.) 
Thumbnail image for CRBIZ1.gif
Speaking of craft artists, it's time to drag out the FTC disclaimers because another one of our books just dropped. That's right, more words, more paper, and even an unrecyclable plastic disk. If we weren't so obsessed with getting higher Bookscan numbers, we'd be drowning in environmental self-hate. Well, maybe, we'll figure out XML, learn ePub basics and solve that issue someday. And for you crafters with an iPod, check out our podcast on the subject.
Hey and speaking of tireless self-promotion. The Dear Rich Staff recently played on a new album by one of our favorite performers


Bookmark and Share
March 9, 2010

Reselling Apple Products Redux

apple-logo.jpgDear Rich: I have a question about one of your posts, titled Reselling Apple Products from February of 2009. I am interested in opening an online store and selling Apple products. However, I am not interested in becoming an authorized reseller. Am I allowed to do that?  I emailed Apple (their reseller program) asking whether I can do that, and they emailed me back this morning: "Ben, you can only sell Apple products as an Apple Authorized Reseller." Are they right? Will I be acting illegally if I open my store and sell their products? Gee, was that really over a year ago that we wrote that post about reselling Apple stuff? Time sure flies when you have mutated DNA.  
Is Apple right? ... Since Apple's email has raised concerns, we reviewed our information. Conclusion: we're standing by our post. The Dear Rich Staff loves its Mac (and by extension that loves goes out to all Apple employees) and we can only assume that the Apple customer service rep who responded to you had a momentary lapse of judgment perhaps triggered by iPad hysteria
Hassling Nonauthorized Resellers? Apple cannot halt resales of legitimately acquired U.S. versions of its products. But it can enforce its copyright and trademark rights which means that they may go after unauthorized resellers who use the Apple logo or name to imply Apple's endorsement, or who lift advertising copy or images from the Apple site. On that basis, they pursued unauthorized iPod sellers in 2005 and pursued unauthorized Mac resellers back in 1998. They will also apparently pursue unauthorized resellers who induce authorized resellers to breach their reseller agreements whatever that means -- we haven't located a reseller agreement, so we're not sure.
Bookmark and Share
July 28, 2009

'Breaker Copies' and the First Sale Doctrine

FirstsaleBooks.jpgDear Rich: On many of the largest online book sites one can select a category called "breaker copy," a book that has been damaged such that it has little value to a collector, but it contains plates and or vintage prints which may then be removed and sold hence the name "breaker copy." There is a huge market for these prints on eBay and other auction sites. My question is, does this fall under the first sale rule or is it a copyright violation? The short answer is that the practice of breaking apart books and selling the components requires a long answer. The Dear Rich staff is sorry to have to drag you through the following sleep-inducing explanation but this area of the law is not fully settled.
What's the First Sale Doctrine?
The first sale doctrine guarantees you the right "to sell or otherwise dispose" of your books, movies and music, etc. But in two California cases, (Mirage and Greenwich Workshop) federal courts ruled that ripping out images from a book and reselling them in frames is not permitted under the first sale doctrine because the seller has created derivative works. A New York court seemed to agree with the California rulings, although that case involved a company that bought posters and then resold them after making them appear like oil paintings on canvas.
The Trouble with the California Cases
The trouble with the California cases is their theory about derivative works. Copyright scholar Melville Nimmer disagreed with it and some courts do not seem to follow it. One court  said that sticking something in a frame is a "mundane" act (don't tell that to these people) and doesn't demonstrate the minimum level of creativity required to create a derivative work.  An Illinois case (Deck the Wallsheld that the practice of cracking open a box of notecards and mounting them on tiles was permissible under the first sale doctrine (a ruling supported by a Texas case, C.M. Paula Co. v. Logancited by the Supreme Court).
What Should You Do?
In summary, you are likely to be headed for a problem if sued in California (or the 9th Circuit).  In other parts of the country, it's murkier. Copyright owners may threaten a lawsuit but not file, concerned they could set a bad precedent. One thing seems certain, you will always be more of a target if you are selling a lot of works by a particular artist -- for example, the collected works of Patrick Nagel vs. a collection of cubist art. And of course many works are in the public domain and you are free to reproduce those without any concerns about the pesky first sale doctrine.
Bookmark and Share
April 20, 2009

Repurposing Music Memorabilia

garbagecan.jpgDear Rich: I just came across your blog entry on repurposed goods and the first sale doctrine. My friend and I are contemplating repurposing music memorabilia into household items using recycled products -- for instance, re-covering a garbage pail with old photos of hair metal bands and selling it at a craft show. Will we run into problems and where can we find more information? I'm so glad you asked. The short answer is, "No, you will not run into problems selling one-of-a-kind repurposed goods." You will only run into problems if you make it seem as if the hair metal band endorses your products or is the source of your products. You can find more information about the legal issues in my book, Getting Permission. As for the Dear Rich staff's recommended choices for "can coverage" -- that would be Cinderella, PoisonRATT, Motley CrueDokkenTesla, and the oft-forgotten (perhaps for good reason) W.A.S.P.    
Bookmark and Share
April 13, 2009

Re-Selling iPods With Pre-Loaded Licensed Content

ipod.jpgDear Rich: I have a question. If I license audio or video content, can I load an iPod with that licensed content and resell it? I'm so glad you asked. The short answer is that it depends what you mean by "licensed content." When you buy the Iron Man movie from the iTunes store, you're really licensing it, and you can't resell that type of "licensed content" on your iPod. But if you enter into a license agreement with the owners of Iron Man that specifically permits reproduction and resale on the iPod, then, yes, you can resell that type of licensed content. Similarly, if your band wanted to sell iPods pre-loaded with its music and videos, that shouldn't be an issue (assuming your band owns all rights to its content). But beware starting one of the many business that engage in selling pre-loaded iPods. According to the Dear Rich staff, this is one of the cloudier issues of copyright law and there is no case law that directly answers your question. Note that companies that rip user-owned DVDs to pre-loaded iPods have faced the wrath of the MPAA. Also, as we noted in a previous post, when reselling iPods, you should avoid any implication that you are a licensed Apple reseller or in any way affiliated with Apple.
Bookmark and Share
June 7, 2008

Repurposing copyrights and trademarks: the first sale doctrine

firstsale.jpg

Dear Rich: I have a question. Can a copyrighted or trademarked item be reused or "repurposed," as they like to say in the recycling circles, into a new product for sale without permission? For example, can someone take a cereal box, cut it up, use the front of the box as a notebook cover and legally sell that notebook? Can someone tear a page from a magazine or calendar, fold that page into an envelope and legally sell that envelope? How about a bottle cap? Can someone fashion a piece of jewelry from a bottle cap that is identifiable in the finished piece? I'm so glad you asked. The short answer: Making jewelry from a bottle cap is probably okay, ripping pages from a magazine and selling envelopes could be fine (but ripping pages from a book or calendar may not), and making notebook covers from cereal boxes may lead to trademark problems.

The long answer (zzzzzz) is a bit more nuanced. Here goes: Copyright law permits the purchaser of a copyrighted work to resell, destroy, or do whatever they want to that work, as long as they don't step on any of the copyright owner's exclusive rights. This principle is known as the first sale doctrine, and that's why people can sell used books, movies, and music on eBay and Amazon. The term "first sale doctrine" comes from the fact that the copyright owner maintains control over a specific copy only until it is first sold. (One exception: If it's a limited edition artwork or fine art work -- for example, signed and numbered photographs created in limited editions of 200 or fewer copies -- you can't destroy it.)

Naturally, things aren't always so simple. For example, two cases involving the resale of artwork seem to have arrived at different results. In one case, a company purchased a book of prints by the painter Patrick Nagel and cut out the individual images in the book and mounted them in frames for resale. A court of appeals in California held that this practice was an infringement and was not permitted under the first sale doctrine. (Mirage Editions, Inc. v. Albuquerque A.R.T. Co., 856 F.2d 1341 (1988).) (A similar result was reached in Greenwich Workshop Inc. v. Timber Creations, Inc., 932 F.Supp. 1210 (C.D. Cal. 1996).) In a different case, a company purchased note cards, mounted them on tiles, and resold them. A federal court in Illinois determined that this practice was okay. (Lee v. Deck the Walls, Inc., 925 F.Supp. 576 (N.D. Ill. 1996.) (The same result occurred in C.M. Paula Co. v. Logan, 355 F.Supp. 189 (D.C. Texas 1973).) So, under these rulings, a person cannot rip individual images from an art book and resell them, but a person can mount individual note cards and resell those. Another case added further confusion when a federal court ruled that the purchaser of a bundle of software programs could resell the individual components (separate programs on CDs). (Softman Products Co. LLC v. Adobe Systems Inc., 171 F.Supp. 2d 1075 (C.D. Cal. 2001).)

You definitely want to take some care selling repurposed items that contain trademarks. Although you're free to sell empty cereal boxes, you want to avoid implying that the cereal company is endorsing or is associated with your notebook products. That's going to be tough to do if the cover of your notebook is identical to the cover of the cereal. Consumers will necessarily confuse the two and likely think the cereal company is selling notebooks (not a major leap, considering they sell to kids). A prominent disclaimer may help -- for example, a statement that your business is not affiliated with or endorsed by the trademarked company. But who's going to want to look at a big disclaimer on the cover? Whatever you do, don't play up the trademarks you use in your company's marketing or business name. For example, it's not a good idea to name your website "Cheerios Notebooks." Finally, as with all issues like this, the lower you are on a company's radar -- that is, the less you sell -- the more likely you are to avoid any hassles.

Bookmark and Share
January 17, 2008

I'm exhausted...

exhaustion.jpgDear Rich: I have a question. Yesterday there was a story in the news about the Supreme Court and 'patent exhaustion.' What is patent exhaustion? I'm so glad you asked. Patent exhaustion is a legal doctrine that basically says that once a patent owner sells a product, the patent owner cannot seek further patent payments for that particular product. So, for example, if you buy a patented lawn mower, the patent owner cannot demand further royalties if you resell the mower or if you make your living mowing lawns. The principle is also known as the "first sale doctrine," a term that also applies in copyright law for a similiar principle. For example, if you buy a copyrighted item such as book or DVD, you are free to resell it without paying the copyright owner. Wait, does that rule apply for copyrighted software? Hmm... that depends on where you live. In some states, courts have held that software isn't sold; it's licensed and can only be 'resold' under the terms of an end-user license agreement. But is software protected under copyright or patent law? Actually, it can be protected under both. If software is protected under patent law, does the first sale apply to patented software or is it considered to be under license? Could I answer this some other time? I'm exhausted.

Bookmark and Share