• Connect
  • Bookmark Us
  • AF Twitter
  • AF YouTube
  • AF LinkedIn
  • Subscribe
  • Subscription Link
Arent Fox
  • Firm

    • History

    • Awards & Recognitions

    • Diversity

      • Overview
      • Diversity Scholarship
      • Employees on Diversity
      • LGBT Initiative
      • Women’s Leadership Development Initiative
    • Alumni

    • Pro Bono

      • Overview
      • Current Pro Bono Work
      • Community Involvement
      • Pro Bono Newsletter
      • Pro Bono Awards & Honors
      • FAQ: Pro Bono & Working at Arent Fox
    • Leadership

      • Firm Management
      • Administrative Leadership
  • Deals & Cases

  • People

  • Practices & Industries

    • Practices

      • Advertising, Promotions & Data Security
      • Government Relations
      • Antitrust & Competition Law
      • Health Care
      • Appellate
      • Insurance & Reinsurance
      • Bankruptcy & Financial Restructuring
      • Intellectual Property
      • Commercial Litigation
      • International Trade
      • Communications, Technology & Mobile
      • Labor & Employment
      • Construction
      • Municipal & Project Finance
      • Consumer Product Safety
      • OSHA
      • Corporate & Securities
      • Political Law
      • ERISA
      • Real Estate
      • Environmental
      • Tax
      • FDA Practice (Food & Drug)
      • Wealth Planning & Management
      • Finance
      • White Collar & Investigations
      • Government Contractor Services
    • Industries

      • Automotive
      • Energy Law & Policy
      • Fashion, Luxury Goods & Retail
      • Government Real Estate & Public Buildings
      • Hospitality
      • Life Sciences
      • Long Term Care & Senior Living
      • Media & Entertainment
      • Medical Devices
      • Nonprofit
      • Sports
  • Newsroom

    • Alerts

    • Events

    • Media Mentions

    • Press Releases

    • Social Media

    • Subscribe

  • Careers

    • Lawyers

    • Law Students

    • Professional Staff

  • Contact

    • Washington, DC

    • New York, NY

    • Los Angeles, CA

    Alerts

    • Newsroom Overview
      • Alerts

        Alerts by Criteria

        E.g., 1 / 22 / 2013
        E.g., 1 / 22 / 2013
      • Events
      • Media Mentions
      • Press Releases
      • Social Media
      • Subscribe

    You are here

    Home » Newsroom » Alerts

    Share

    • Printer-friendly version
    • Send by email
    • A Title
    • A Title
    • A Title
    • A
    • A
    • A

    eBay Reseller Denied Protections of First Sale Doctrine

    February 28, 2012

    The US District Court for the Northern District of California recently issued a decision in Adobe Systems Inc. v. Hoops Enterprise LLC, denying an eBay reseller of copyrighted works the protections of the first sale doctrine. The decision emphasizes the crucial distinction between licenses and sales of copyrighted works, as under Ninth Circuit precedent, the first sale affirmative defense does not apply to licensed works.

    Adobe Systems Inc. (“Adobe”) sells copyrighted computer software, including the popular Photoshop Elements 8. Sometimes rather than selling its software separately, Adobe enters into licensing agreements with computer hardware manufacturers, such as Dell or Hewlett Packard, where Adobe’s software is preinstalled on the other party’s computers.

    The defendant in Adobe Systems Inc. purchased bundled computer hardware and software and then resold the Adobe software separately on eBay without authorization from Adobe. The defendant claimed his actions were protected by the first sale doctrine, which holds that a bona fide purchaser of a physical copy of a copyrighted work may sell that copy to a third party without infringing the copyright owner’s exclusive distribution rights. He also alleged copyright misuse and unfair competition claims under state law.

    In granting Adobe’s motion for partial summary judgment, the court found the first sale doctrine was not applicable to the case at bar because the software at issue was licensed to the original purchasers (e.g. Dell and Hewlett Packard), rather than sold to them. In holding that the software was licensed rather than sold, the court emphasized that the agreement between Adobe and the hardware manufactures (a) specifically stated that it granted a license to the software, (b) significantly restricted the user’s ability to transfer the software, and (c) imposed significant use restrictions on the software. The court also followed the landmark Ninth Circuit decision in Omega S.A. v. Costco Wholesale Corp., which found that the first sale doctrine does not apply to products that are manufactured abroad.

    The Adobe case demonstrates to copyright owners the importance of properly drafting copyright license agreements and maintaining sufficient control over their licensed products so they do not lose the exclusive rights conferred by the Copyright Act.

    For assistance with drafting copyright license agreements or more information on the first sale doctrine, please contact the attorneys listed at right.

    Related People

    • Sarah L. Bruno
    • Anthony V. Lupo
    • Amy E. Salomon

    Related Practices

    Intellectual Property
    • Firm
    • Deals & Cases
    • People
    • Practices & Industries
    • Newsroom
    • Careers
    • Contact

    Footer Main

    • Firm
    • Deals & Cases
    • People
    • Practices & Industries
    • Newsroom
    • Careers
    • Subscribe
    • Alumni
    • Diversity
    • Legal Notice
    • Privacy Policy
    • Social Media Disclaimer
    • Nondiscrimination
    • Site Map
    • Client/Staff Login

    Offices

    • Washington, DC
      1717 K Street, NW
      Washington, DC 20036
      Tel: 202.857.6000
    • New York, NY
      1675 Broadway
      New York, New York 10019
      Tel: 212.484.3900
    • Los Angeles, CA
      555 West Fifth Street, 48th Floor
      Los Angeles, California 90013
      Tel: 213.629.7400
    • © Copyright 2013 Arent Fox LLP. All Rights Reserved.

      Legal Disclaimer
      Contents may contain attorney advertising under the laws of some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.