I don’t see why it is our SCOTUS place to figure out why foreign countries can not get a better handle on the problem of goods that are unlawfully made on their own soil.
The fact that the DVD someone bought in Hong Kong might be a pirated copy is a red herring. There was never any question that the textbooks were indeed lawfully made.
If concerns about pirated goods are to take precedence over first use rights then the resale of any copyrighted or trademarked work whether produced domestically or not should be prohibited.
No one will ever be able to prove if a copy was pirated or not.
What if someone legally downloads an MP3 at 99 cents a song and then resells it for 10 cents a song? Is that legal?
Indeed. But the issue that the dissent raises, which is a valid one, is that the textbooks were not lawfully made under the Copyright Act. And they were not lawfully made under the Copyright Act because the Copyright Act does not apply in foreign countries. How can a work be lawfully made under the Copyright Act when it is not subject to the Copyright Act?