« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
This provision of the first sale doctrine limits only the copyright owner's distribution right; it in no way affects the reproduction right. Thus, the first sale doctrine does not allow the transmission of a copy of a work (through a computer network, for instance), because, under current technology the transmitter retains the original copy of the work while the recipient of the transmission obtains a reproduction of the original copy (i.e., a new copy), rather than the copy owned by the transmitter. The language of the Copyright Act, the legislative history and case law make clear that the doctrine is applicable only to those situations where the owner of a particular copy disposes of physical possession of that particular copy.
If the owner of a particular copy transmits a copy to another person without authorization (either from the copyright owner or the law), such a transmission would involve an unlawful reproduction of a work, and the first sale doctrine would not shield the transmitter from liability for the reproduction nor for the distribution. Under the first sale doctrine, the owner of a particular copy of a copyrighted work may distribute it, but may not reproduce Therefore, the transmission would constitute infringement of the copyright owner's reproduction right.
290 See 17 U.S.C. § 109(a) (1988) ("the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord... is entitled... to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord"); HOUSE REPORT at 79, reprinted in 1976 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5693 (under the first sale doctrine in Section 109 "the copyright owner's exclusive right of public distribution would have no effect upon anyone who owns 'a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title' and who wishes to transfer it to someone else...") See also, e.g., Columbia Pictures Indus. v. Redd Horne, Inc., 749 F.2d 154, 159 (3d Cir. 1984) ("first sale doctrine prevents the copyright owner from controlling the future transfer of a particular copy once its material ownership has been transferred").
291 HOUSE REPORT at 79, reprinted in 1976 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5693 (under the first sale doctrine, "the owner of the physical copy or phonorecord cannot reproduce or perform the copyrighted work publicly without the copyright owner's consent").
If the reproduction is lawful under another provision of the Copyright Act, the transmission would likely not be an infringement. See infra p. 95.
If the reproduction is unlawful, further distribution of the unlawful reproduction would not be allowed under the first sale doctrine because the copy distributed would not be one "lawfully made" under the Copyright Act, as required by
The requirement that copies distributed under the doctrine be "lawfully made" under the Copyright Act does not limit the doctrine's application to copies made or authorized by the copyright owner. A copy could be "lawfully made," for example, if the reproduction is lawful under the fair use provision; the distribution of such a copy would be permitted within the limits of the first sale doctrine.
It has also been suggested that the scope of the first sale doctrine be narrowed to exclude copies obtained via transmission. This would mean, for instance, that if a copy of a literary work is legally purchased on-line and the copy so purchased is downloaded onto the purchaser's disk, the disk could not be resold. Clearly, the first sale doctrine should apply if the particular copy involved is in fact the copy that is further distributed, even if the copy was first obtained by transmission. Further, if the technology utilized allows the transmission of a copy without making an unlawful reproduction i.e., no copy remains with the original owner -- the first sale doctrine would apply and the transmission would not be an infringement.
Some argue that the first sale doctrine should also apply to transmissions, as long as the transmitter destroys or deletes from his or her computer the original copy from which the reproduction in the receiving computer was made. The proponents of this view argue that at the completion of the activity, only one copy would exist between the original owner who transmitted the copy and
See HOUSE REPORT at 79, reprinted in 1976 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5693.
the person who received it the same number of copies as at the beginning. However, this zero sum gaming analysis misses the point. The question is not whether there exist the same number of copies at the completion of the transaction or not. The question is whether the transaction when viewed as a whole violates one or more of the exclusive rights, and there is no applicable exception from liability. In this case, without any doubt, a reproduction of the work takes place in the receiving computer. To apply the first sale doctrine in such a case would vitiate the reproduction right.
A copyright owner's exclusive right to publicly display copies of a work is also limited by Section 109:
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106(5)
Thus, an art gallery that purchases a painting may publicly display it without liability. The owner of a particular copy of an electronic audiovisual game intended for use in coinoperated equipment may also publicly perform or display that game in that equipment.295
17 U.S.C. § 109(c) (1988).
Section 109(e) reversed the decision in Red Baron-Franklin Park, Inc. v. Taito Corp., 883 F.2d 275 (4th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1058 (1990), which held that video games could not be operated in an arcade without the permission of the copyright owner because such operation entailed violation of the copyright owner's exclusive rights to perform and display the work publicly. Section 109(e), however, does not allow the public display or performance of any other work of authorship embodied in the audiovisual game if the copyright
This exemption from liability would not apply to the public display of a copy of a work on a bulletin board system or other computer or communications network, because more than one image would likely be displayed at a time (to different viewers) and viewers would not be "present at the place where the copy is located."
The first sale doctrine allows the owner of a particular, lawfully-made copy of a work to dispose of it in any manner, with certain exceptions, without infringing the copyright owner's exclusive right of distribution. It seems clear that the first sale model -- in which the copyright owner parts company with a tangible copy should not apply with respect to distribution by transmission, because transmission by means of current technology involves both the reproduction of the work and the distribution of that reproduction. In the case of transmissions, the owner of a particular copy of a work does not "dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord." A copy of the work remains with the first owner and the recipient of the transmission receives another copy of the work.
d. EDUCATIONAL USE EXEMPTIONS
Section 110(1) exempts from infringement liability the performance or display of a copyrighted work in the course of face-to-face teaching activities by a non-profit educational institution in a classroom or similar setting."
Section 110(2) exempts from liability the transmission of a performance or display of a copyrighted work if (1) the performance or display is a regular part of the systematic instructional activities of the non-profit educational institution; (2) the performance or display is directly related
owner of the game is not also the copyright owner of the other work. See 17 U.S.C. § 109(e) (Supp. V 1993).
See discussion of rental rights with regard to phonorecords and copies of computer programs supra notes 287-89 and accompanying text.
and of material assistance to the teaching content of the transmission; and (3) the transmission is made primarily for reception in classrooms or similar places or by persons to whom the transmission is directed because of their disabilities.298
Like the library exemptions, the educational use exemptions are provided in addition to the fair use and other general exemptions, which are also available to educational institutions.
e. OTHER LIMITATIONS
REPRODUCTION OF COMPUTER PROGRAMS
The rights of an owner of a copyright in a computer program are limited such that the owner of a particular copy of a computer program may make a copy or adaptation of the program as an "essential step" in using the computer 299 This program in a computer or for archival purposes.
See 17 U.S.C. § 110(2) (1988).
Section 117 of the Copyright Act provides:
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an
(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential
(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only
17 U.S.C. § 117 (1988 & Supp. V 1993). Any identical copies made in