Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Andrew5, post: 2485503, member: 74569&quot;]Actually regarding the Prada bag and Ray Bans this type of removal occurs because manufacturers want to eliminate competitionfrom secondary markets. They used claim a copyright or trademark violation but now call everything they don&#039;t like a fake and the e-commerce platform has no real way to know who is telling the truth.&nbsp; It&#039;s hard for the small retail seller to defend in these situations.&nbsp; But understand this has nothing to do with fakes and everything to do with big brands wanting to keep your used or gray market good from competing with the goods being sold by their authorized dealers.&nbsp; A few years ago the Supreme Court put this issue (we hoped) to bed in a case called Wiley v. Kirtsaeng.&nbsp; Kirtsaeng was a Thai grad student going to school in the US.&nbsp; His parents were sending him legitimate textbooks that the publisher was making overseas and, using flimsier paper and binding, selling for a lower cost then US students paid for the same content.&nbsp; He then sold these textbooks online in competition with the publisher Wiley.&nbsp; Wiley, none to happy with competition from their own product sued kirtsaeng claiming a copyright act violation.&nbsp; The copyright act, which forbids copies, has various exceptions. For instance the creator can make copies. Also there&#039;s fair use which is why museums can display works they may not own. The First Sale Doctrine is the one that keeps e-commerce alive. It says if a good has gone through a legitimate first sale then the manufacturers rights are extinguished (they got paid) and the good can be resold, lent, given away. This is why you can donate stuff to Goodwill or books to the library without violating the copyright act.&nbsp; Manufacturers HATE the first sale doctrine. Wiley tried to argue that FSD did not apply to goods made overseas or intended for the foreign markets. Breyer rightful pointed out what a bizarre impact this would have - we already make enough stuff overseas because of lower labor costs now we are going to actually give manufacturers copyright protection for moving stuff to Mexico?!?&nbsp; The court ruled for Kirtsaeng saying it doesn&#039;t matter where in the world something is made, if it went through a legitimate first sale it is freely alienable.&nbsp; So now the only way a manufacturer can get something pulled is by claiming its &quot;fake&quot; as that clearly violates the law.&nbsp; Next time that happens to you know Ray Ban is violating your rights.&nbsp; Sorry for the long winded response but I spend a lot time working on this and it pisses me off when people are just trying to sell an unwanted good only to get smacked down by these big rights holders.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in