I am not a fan of political discourse in LEGO forums but since this website is about making $$ on your LEGO sets, I felt it was relevant to mention here as it has direct ramifications on the buying and selling of LEGO sets. (and a million other things.) Or maybe this does not affect LEGO sets. I am a worker bee, not a lawyer... "This morning the Supreme Court announced that it will hear arguments in a case with far-reaching implications for anyone who has ever sold or given away goods that contained copies of copyrighted works. Public Knowledge, along with the Electronic Frontier Foundation and U.S. PIRG, filed an amicus brief in January urging the Court to hear this case. The Court should ultimately reverse the lower court's ruling, which effectively granted copyright holders a perpetual distribution right for any copies manufactured outside of the United States." http://publicknowledge.org/blog/supreme-court-will-hear-case-importation-and- "Tucked into the U.S. Supreme Court

And for the record, I don't think it stands a snow ball's chance in hell in over turning today's S.O.P.

And for the record, I don't think it stands a snow ball's chance in hell in over turning today's S.O.P.

I really cannot see this even having a leg to stand on, honestly. Is Big Brother that bound and determined to kill the economy?! Cause that is exactly what this and the other will do.

Thanks for bringing this and the other article to our attention, pickleboy.

Both articles and petitions need serious attention. You already have my support.

LOL I agree, no chance of this getting through. How far does this reach? To the absurd side: I cannot resell my car because the intellectual property belongs to someone else? What about my house?

How far does this reach? To the absurd side: I cannot resell my car because the intellectual property belongs to someone else? What about my house?

Exactly. Where is the line drawn?

For example, what about my TV or computer? I can't resell either one because of parts made in China or Japan?

Hmmm yes this is very absurd. No one can limit your ability to resell your own goods. You're not rebranding or renaming it and you're selling it in it's "original" state. By this I mean you are not changing anything in the description of the product and it's unchanged except for the wear due to usage or time. If something like this would ever pass in the courts of law, the next thing would be that you need permission from your constructor or engineer to resell your home because they have copyright on your house or they consider it a work of art. It's utter nonesense and yes, it would completely destroy the economy of the world. I also think it would be an administrational hell :D

My guess is they would do it like they do music and movies for bars and restaurants. You pay a fee to an organization and then you have the right to play the music of any of the artists that they represent. (I forget the names of the two big ones.) My guess is if something like this ever passed, it would be the same. They would force you to pay an annual fee to some organization who in turn pays a fees to companies. Another total guess would this would only apply to people making over xzy $$'s or selling XYZ numbers of one product. I doubt it change but these shady aholes already have a system in place to screw us...

And while we all say it won't happen, one court has already sided with the company. "Under the doctrine, which the Supreme Court has recognized since 1908, you can resell your stuff without worry because the copyright holder only had control over the first sale. Put simply, though Apple Inc. AAPL has the copyright on the iPhone and Mark Owen has it on the book

My guess is they would do it like they do music and movies for bars and restaurants. You pay a fee to an organization and then you have the right to play the music of any of the artists that they represent. (I forget the names of the two big ones.)

My guess is if something like this ever passed, it would be the same. They would force you to pay an annual fee to some organization who in turn pays a fees to companies. Another total guess would this would only apply to people making over xzy $$'s or selling XYZ numbers of one product.

I doubt it change but these shady aholes already have a system in place to screw us...

Well the music and movie fees are for reproducing it while making profit (bars and restaurants), not reselling the cd or dvd once you bought it. That is the main difference. They don't charge you a monthly fee or you don't have to have a licence to play the music at home. Once you bought the CD you can even make copies of it for your personal use. Distribution of copied materials is forbidden. This is the copyright low and it's intention is to limit the unauthorized copying of materials.

When you resell something you're not copying anything and you're not creating a new product. Who would they ask for permission for antique reselling? It's absurd.

There will always be stupid verdicts because there are always a few corrupt or stupid judges, but according to any law this kind of practice won't stand.

Yes - it is nonsense. As likely to pass, as it would be to say that until the air is free of pollutants - we will not allow it to be breathed.

Well the music and movie fees are for reproducing it while making profit (bars and restaurants), not reselling the cd or dvd once you bought it. That is the main difference. They don't charge you a monthly fee or you don't have to have a licence to play the music at home. Once you bought the CD you can even make copies of it for your personal use. Distribution of copied materials is forbidden. This is the copyright low and it's intention is to limit the unauthorized copying of materials.

When you resell something you're not copying anything and you're not creating a new product. Who would they ask for permission for antique reselling? It's absurd.

There will always be stupid verdicts because there are always a few corrupt or stupid judges, but according to any law this kind of practice won't stand.

Very True

I personally am not nearly as worried about something like this as I am about the possibility of the government raising taxes. While I am relatively new to Lego investing, my big question is has anyone here ever been sent anything by the IRS? I heard if you go over something like $20,000 selling on eBay you will be sent a form? I know $20,000 is a lot, but if you play your cards right with your purchases, it really isn't that unrealistic.

I personally am not nearly as worried about something like this as I am about the possibility of the government raising taxes. While I am relatively new to Lego investing, my big question is has anyone here ever been sent anything by the IRS? I heard if you go over something like $20,000 selling on eBay you will be sent a form? I know $20,000 is a lot, but if you play your cards right with your purchases, it really isn't that unrealistic.

. http://www.brickpicker.com/index.php/forums/viewthread/1759/

The unholy nightmare if unintended legal consequences that would be unleashed upon the unsuspecting public by allowing this sort of interpretation of copyright law to stand simply boggles the mind. It challenges the very concept of private ownership, and is completely unenforceable as it would make almost all ordinary acts of commerce instantly acts of piracy. Remember, in a global community you'd be hard pressed to find a consumer product that didn't have at least a component sourced from a non-domestic supplier. What a legal nightmare. Not going to happen.

If anyone here plays video games on any scale they might have heard the rumors that the new Xbox and Playstation will not play used games on them. The argument for this is that the game publishers get none of the profit of the used games sales. So to make it so that the games are all bought new, they will make every used game worthless if not played by the original purchaser. While this is almost impossible for Lego and I don't think they would ever have any intentions of attempting anything similar to this, what this will do to the market for video games might actually be devastating. I can say that I will not purchase a new system if this occurs, since I help pay for new games to play by selling my games used online. I think this is an awful business plan, especially because when companies pull stuff like this it just makes for a massive growth in illegal downloads and things like that. Some of what I said in this might be off a bit, but I think the general point is that there will be more backlash from customers if they attempt something like this.

If anyone here plays video games on any scale they might have heard the rumors that the new Xbox and Playstation will not play used games on them. The argument for this is that the game publishers get none of the profit of the used games sales. So to make it so that the games are all bought new, they will make every used game worthless if not played by the original purchaser. While this is almost impossible for Lego and I don't think they would ever have any intentions of attempting anything similar to this, what this will do to the market for video games might actually be devastating. I can say that I will not purchase a new system if this occurs, since I help pay for new games to play by selling my games used online. I think this is an awful business plan, especially because when companies pull stuff like this it just makes for a massive growth in illegal downloads and things like that. Some of what I said in this might be off a bit, but I think the general point is that there will be more backlash from customers if they attempt something like this.

I agree with you here. This kind of financial plan is not good for the company itself. Let me elaborate a bit further...

First of all if any company says that they don't profit from used game sales they deserve to be bankrupt, demolished and built a nice little park over them. Used games keep up the interest in the console and keep people from resorting to piracy. If you can't play any used games on your console what's the use of it? You can't go around buying new games every week. It costs a TON!

My opinion is that this won't happen. Even if it does, the ROI would be so negative that the man who suggested this would be fired and hanged. Just look at the MMORPGs market. Many of the most famous titles had a monthly fee to play. Today only WOW still has it (I think) because the number of players kept decreasing month after month. People won't pay for something they can get free somewhere else, especially in these difficult times. If Playstation and Xbox would implement a no-used game policy, I bet that a month after that their console sale would drop to an all time low.

I agree with you here. This kind of financial plan is not good for the company itself. Let me elaborate a bit further...

First of all if any company says that they don't profit from used game sales they deserve to be bankrupt, demolished and built a nice little park over them. Used games keep up the interest in the console and keep people from resorting to piracy. If you can't play any used games on your console what's the use of it? You can't go around buying new games every week. It costs a TON!

My opinion is that this won't happen. Even if it does, the ROI would be so negative that the man who suggested this would be fired and hanged. Just look at the MMORPGs market. Many of the most famous titles had a monthly fee to play. Today only WOW still has it (I think) because the number of players kept decreasing month after month. People won't pay for something they can get free somewhere else, especially in these difficult times. If Playstation and Xbox would implement a no-used game policy, I bet that a month after that their console sale would drop to an all time low.

As an old time gamer, the wave of the future will be downloadable content. The future is no discs. So no reselling games by GameStop and similar companies.

On topic, the government is looking at all types of taxation and this could generate huge sums for our tax happy politicians. They don't give a crap about the people. What did we hear before the election...."We won't raise taxes on the middle class!" Then what happens Jan 1? A 2% tax hike on most Americans receiving a paycheck. Call it what you want, but I make less money today than a month ago. The Internet tax will be enacted....eventually.

Off topic...How about the proposed "wealth tax" in which the government can tax your possessions after you paid for them? Expensive painting? Taxed. Expensive jewelry? Taxed. Expensive LEGO set like the 10179....can very well be taxed a second time under this new idea. How's them apples?

Even if this bill somehow did pass it would not be enforced. Far too much money would have to be spent, and that is not something that the police, or the feds would want to waste their limited time or money on, because almost everyone would continue to sell their used goods anyways.

As an old time gamer, the wave of the future will be downloadable content. The future is no discs. So no reselling games by GameStop and similar companies.

On topic, the government is looking at all types of taxation and this could generate huge sums for our tax happy politicians. They don't give a crap about the people. What did we hear before the election...."We won't raise taxes on the middle class!" Then what happens Jan 1? A 2% tax hike on most Americans receiving a paycheck. Call it what you want, but I make less money today than a month ago. The Internet tax will be enacted....eventually.

Off topic...How about the proposed "wealth tax" in which the government can tax your possessions after you paid for them? Expensive painting? Taxed. Expensive jewelry? Taxed. Expensive LEGO set like the 10179....can very well be taxed a second time under this new idea. How's them apples?

We pay PPT on cars in VA & we all pay it on our houses. Either way we pay, however they decide to get it. Do you think that states without state taxes use volunteers to run things? of course not, they just use tolls or find other ways to collect the $.

I would imagine a law like this if enforced would cause a huge riot. Many people across the country are already on the edge just at the tease of their guns being taken away. This is far worse than gun laws imo and would push them over the edge. Although, thinking about it, if this only affects products made overseas, they likely wouldn't enforce it and if they did, then Americans would stop buying their products. This could mean the second coming over American made goods.

This kind of reminds me of the SOPA for economies. With people like us, we can't allow it.

If anyone here plays video games on any scale they might have heard the rumors that the new Xbox and Playstation will not play used games on them.

Yeah, I heard about that before, which brings up the question of "how the heck do they plan on doing that?" I mean seriously, how can your console tell if a game is brand new or used? (Oh I'm sorry, I meant 'previously owned'. Sheesh....) I know computer games lately have all sorts of crazy asinine methods to make sure you never really own the darn game in the first place. Between Digital Rights Management and Persistant Online Connection, is it any wonder why the average law-abiding people are deliberately looking for hacked versions of the game, just so that they can actually play the dang thing they paid for in the first f***ing place!

The argument for this is that the game publishers get none of the profit of the used games sales.

Just that statement alone shows how petty and fueled by greed this is. Come on, a big time electronics company is literally going to piss away tons of cash on this charade, just because they won't get a cut of the $10-$20 bucks 'Joe Schmoe' gets from selling the game he played and doesn't want anymore? You have got to be kidding me....

This kind of reminds me of the SOPA for economies. With people like us, we can't allow it.

Funny you mention SOPA, cause this whole thing reminds me exactly of that and the other one, PIPA. Both sounded innocent enough and for a good cause, but truth is they both were a Trojan Horse. I mean that as in, the outward appearance seemed like good intentions (like the road to hell), but inside was the real horror that would have screwed over anyone and everyone that used the internet.

Yeah, I heard about that before, which brings up the question of "how the heck do they plan on doing that?" I mean seriously, how can your console tell if a game is brand new or used? (Oh I'm sorry, I meant 'previously owned'. Sheesh....) I know computer games lately have all sorts of crazy asinine methods to make sure you never really own the darn game in the first place. Between Digital Rights Management and Persistant Online Connection, is it any wonder why the average law-abiding people are deliberately looking for hacked versions of the game, just so that they can actually play the dang thing they paid for in the first f***ing place!I can not remember if this was a rumor, or real news but I read last year, or maybe even two that one of the two companies created a new chip that would could detect if the disc was new or old.

Though, the easiest way for the company to do this would be to make every person register their game with an included authorization number.

If this were to happen I would expect to see a huge increase in job revenue for modders as people figure out ways around this.

If it means anything I don't think anything like this will happen soon. But the way they would do it is that they would encode the blu-ray to make it so that once played on a system, it would be unplayable on everything else. As for the Supreme Court case, these government controls are what create a rise in black markets. I am not suggesting that this business will turn into a bunch of dark alley Lego dealings. If anything like this ever did happen, it would lead to a horrible reaction in consumer spending.

As for the Supreme Court case, these government controls are what create a rise in black markets. I am not suggesting that this business will turn into a bunch of dark alley Lego dealings.

I hope it does not, but what do these companies expect? When you start treating your customers as if each one are potential criminals by limiting their ability to even remotely use your product or not really even give them the product that they paid for, what other reaction can there be but to find illegal means around the problem the company deliberately created?

It is not right to hack software, but it is also not right to pay $60 for something, be forced to jump through a bunch of flaming hoops by installing one program after program to make the other ones possibly work, download patches for a million things, sign up for so many different services, and by the end of it all just maybe the game will work at all. Oh, and then insult to injury, usually you can only install it once. So if there is any kind of problem ranging from your super computer not being 'powerful enough' to 'just cause' and you need to reinstall, now you either have to buy the game all over again or get the company (or whom ever it is) to re-accept your activation code IF they ever get around to it.

Jeezus, I don't have even a tenth of this kind of headache with Indie games.

Seriously.