First Sale Doctrine applies to specific copies of creative works (i.e., a book or DVD).
It doesn't apply to licenses for creative works. When you buy an ebook, you are buying a license to create copies of the creative work as necessary to make use of the license purchased (i.e., a copy in your phone or on your kindle).
FSD doesn't let you sell either of those transient copies, and it doesn't apply to the license itself because the license isn't a copy within the meaning of the statute underlying the FSD. In the rare occasion where the license and the copy are one and the same for a digital good, the FSD would apply.
Sale of goods refers to goods, which do not include intellectual property. The first sale doctrine refers to resale of goods which contain copies of intellectual property (such as books and DVDs), and refers only to the transfer of the limited licence embodied inside the good. It allows you to resell the DVD with licence attached, but doesn't allow you to copy the DVD at all. It doesn't grant you any additional rights that you didn't already have at the point of sale.
Please try not to be so aggressive when you don't know what you're talking about.
You can't distribute copies of the book (outside of limited exceptions).
First Sale doctrine says you can pretty much do whatever you want with the physical item.
First sale doctrine says if I buy something, I now completely own it and I can do as I please with it, even if it goes against any of the former owner's wishes or intent.
To be clear, First Sale Doctrine does apply to physical goods: the doctrine pre-dates copyrighted digital goods. The idea was that a publisher couldn't prevent someone from reselling their paperback copy of a novel after they've read it (for example).
Of course, it in theory could apply to digital goods as well, but most copyrighted digital goods you don't actually buy, you just license. Good luck reselling a Kindle book. You have to strip the DRM first, which, while possible, violates the DMCA.
First-sale isn't relevant to this scenario. First-sale applies only to a specific copy. This is either a transfer of ownership or licensing agreement issue.
I see a bunch of folks confusing first sale doctrines, contract law, etc here, so let me give a very short generalized primer:
1. The first sale doctrine is exhaustion of a single right of the exclusive copyright rights. In particular: It states that the right to restrict distribution[1] terminates upon first sale. It's codified at 17 USC 109, and states: "... the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord. "
As mention, this is exhaustion a very specific right of copyright, and applies to copyrighted works. In this case, that would be software. It has literally no bearing on a contract as part of the sale of goods, or whether you can sue for breach of that contract. It is a defense to copyright infringement.
To whit:
If I sell you a book, as part of a contract, and that contract says "no resale", and you sell it, the first sale doctrine would probably[2] prevent me from winning a lawsuit for copyright infringement but not prevent me from winning a lawsuit for for breach of contract.
2. Sales of tangible goods in the US are covered by the UCC (uniform commercial code). Every state has passed a version of the UCC (though not all are on the same revision, for this discussion, it doesn't really matter).
The UCC lets you freely contract for almost anything. It fills in and has default terms when not stated, requires some contracts be in writing, etc, but there is generally nothing that prevents you from doing something like preventing resale of an object. You can argue it's unconscionable to a court, or you can argue it violates some other law (antitrust, whatever), and thus the court should not enforce it but in most cases, it'll be a valid and enforceable contract on its face. In general, if you have a legal right to do something, you can validly contract to forgo that legal right. For example, you can promise to not marry anyone until age 30, promise to marry someone in exchange for money, etc (Neither of these would be UCC contracts)
3. As a final note, for sales of UCC goods, there is no additional consideration necessary for them to modify the agreement, only the general requirement of good faith.
I offer literally no opinion on the status of this particular agreement, or anything like it. The above is also not legal advice (among other things, i've left out exceptions, and merchant <-> merchant rules, and ...), just an attempt to clear up some common misconceptions.
[1] "to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;" Note that "distribute copies" does not mean "make copies", it literally means "distribute" an already made copy. Reproduction is a separate right.
[2] There are some current cases (and past ones) making arguments that you can contract away your first sale rights. The problem with this idea is that as titled and written, 17 USC 109 is, IMHO, not an affirmative right (and thus something you could agree to forego, even though some cases hold it must be pleaded as an affirmative defense), but instead a limitation on the exclusive rights the owner has. It's even titled " Limitations on exclusive rights: Effect of transfer of particular copy or phonorecord".
This is why the standard mechanism software companies attempt to use is to classify their agreements as licenses that do not transfer ownership, rather than sales that do. If you are not an owner, the first sale doctrine does not help you. Success varies in ability to convince courts they aren't selling software, but instead, licensing it. In the end, it may not matter if they can succeed by suing for breach of contract rather than copyright infringement :)
First sale doctrine is related to the sale of physical articles of copyrighted items.
The appropriate body of law for purely physical goods is "equitable servitudes on chattels" (aka post-sale restraints). Generally illegal, but some restraints are allowed.
For example, a ban on resale is generally not enforceable, but a right of refusal is (however, if the seller refuses to buy back the item, the buyer is free to sell to whoever they want). Additionally, sellers can simply refuse to sell additional items to the buyer, which is what Ferrari, Jaguar, and other luxury car makers do. (Watchmakers also do this.)
reply