The rest of the thread notwithstanding, this is not what First Sale Doctrine does, at all!
The rest of the thread notwithstanding, this is not what First Sale Doctrine does, at all!
So it sort of is what first sale doctrine does. shopify is asking them to produce proof they have authorization to sell something they've already purchased and need no special rights to sell, regardless of whether they're branded or not.
They're selling books and even soaps with "deadwood" in the name, and they / the publisher (sounds like they're both run by him?) appear to have directly lifted the photo for the cover of one of the books:
https://mzs.press/The-Last-Western-Deadwood-and-the-End-of-A...
...from here: https://deadwood.fandom.com/wiki/Deadwood_(episode)?file=Sea...
My guess is that Seitz got nailed by trademark and copyright infringement claims and is now spinning a story about how his poor poor book shop is getting screwed over by the Big Evil Corporation, as witnessed by the very histrionic language he uses in his tweets.
> ...
> (3) use of the mark does not suggest sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark owner
https://www.inta.org/fact-sheets/fair-use-of-trademarks-inte...
I'm not a lawyer, but "Deadwood Soap with a Prize Inside: Dirt" sounds like it could suggest sponsorship or endorsement to me.
Of course, as teh_klev pointed out, this most likely isn't the cause of the store's Shopify problems since HBO says they're OK with what the store does.
Right, but it doesn't make it illegal, as stated by the seller, for Shopify to have these requirements.
I'm giving the seller full benefit of the doubt that they were not selling anything that violates copyright / trademark law. The point is the doctrine still doesn't make Shopify's request or requirements illegal.
Just like a web forum banning you for posting something annoying is not a violation of your constitutional freedom of speech.
The current law and constitution don't protect you from these actions.
Since shopify doesn't actually tell them what items are an issue, it is requiring them to compile a full accounting including 'proof' of their ability to sell all of their items within 48 hours, or else suffer financial consequences when their store is shut down.
So it doesn't involve the constitution, but rather its shopify's unreasonable and unexplained policies and vague threats that are causing financial damage to this small business owner, demanding something that might not exist at all, because no special rights are required to sell 'branded products' legally purchased, and shopify will not specify what the issue is, so demands such an accounting for the entire store within an unreasonable length of time.
These seem to be saying that:
> I’m gonna have an update for you later today on my continuing communications with @Shopify. They are now asking for purchase receipts to sell Star Wars books on their platform. This is both illegal and nonsensical.
https://twitter.com/mattzollerseitz/status/15425335496891310...
>As detailed higher up in this thread, neither Shopify nor anyone has a legal right to demand documentation in order to sell, resell, give away, or otherwise dispose of published material, according to the First Sale Doctrine. Big thanks to Twitter mutuals for hipping me to this.
https://twitter.com/mattzollerseitz/status/15455428048600145...
>I responded with an email restating that the First Sale Doctrine makes such a request both nonsensical and illegal, and asked a few more questions.
https://twitter.com/mattzollerseitz/status/15455428184243609...
>"All of this was not only unnecessary but illegal as covered by the First Sale Doctrine."
https://twitter.com/mattzollerseitz/status/15455452242351308...
I agree with you that what Shopify is doing is bad and doesn't make sense. Freezing or taking money might be illegal. But I would think it's not illegal for Shopify to ban an account due to some system flagging it as suspicious, because I assume the Shopify TOS say they can do that.