First Sale Doctrine

Right, on Amazon nowadays it’s a risky game if you’re not authorized by the brand.

For people selling in their own private businesses the first sale doctrine gives them the right to resell whatever they want. That of course does not apply to Amazon or most other major platforms now. That’s the key point most “I watched youtube” sellers miss. Having the legal right to resell doesn’t mean you’re following the platform’s private rules.


Very very correct.

Legally it applies to NO OTHER platforms. 1st Sale does not dictate what you are allowed to do on private platforms or businesses owned by others. Only to your own business, and this is what people fail to learn when they scream 'BUT THE 1st SALE Doct!"


There are still limits on some normal priced items I’ve seen recently. Nothing stupid, but like Limit 5 on a BBQ Grill


I said most because there’s some platforms that don’t give a crap what you do because they’re outside of US law.


Nope… The days of the wild west of online selling are coming to an end, as are mom and pop stores with grey market goods.

Thank (enter your preferred deity name here) it has finally started and the legal system is starting to pick the scabs off the marketplace.


That case is specifically because the warranty doesn’t apply if it’s an unauthorized seller, which makes it “materially different.”

If the product has no warranty or something else that doesn’t apply when it’s purchased from an unauthorized source, there’s no real case. Also, you can always sell anything if you don’t falsely advertise that it’s “new with all warranties”

The primary dispute here is over the fact that Triplenet included the invalid warranty.


That’s just the only legal angle they could go after them for

1 Like

They also went after them for damage to the brand and associated dealer network and quality control.
" Foremost, Otter established that it had legitimate quality control measures insofar as it allows its products to be sold to consumers only by it or authorized resellers.Additionally, Otter’s authorized resellers must follow detailed instructions on shipping, product inspection, removal and reporting of damaged goods, and product display. Otter established that its quality controls were not pretextual by producing evidence that, for example, it regularly audits its online authorized sellers’ websites and product listings. Moreover, the court found that Triplenet’s nonconforming sales diminished the value of Otter’s trademarks because such sales interfered with Otter’s ability to ensure its products adhered to its quality standards."

F all the amateur grey market trash. If a brand does not care and states as such to a seller that is one thing. To assume a seller can do it simply because inventory is available/accessible is not right, and I very much enjoy watching them burn for doing so.


109. Limitations on exclusive rights: Effect of transfer of particular copy or phonorecord

Full text
1 Like

Yepper. Material Difference & Quality Control are the two exceptions to FSD that are currently prevailing as riding precedents in stare decisis.

I once had a tutorial on this posted in several of the Vorys-bashing OSFE threads, but they are currently n/l/a beyond our own archives (@ least w/o a disclosure order, and/or some elevated skill in penetrating databases which are obscured by clouds).

1 Like