If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Marketwatch)   Supreme Court to decide whether or not you're allowed to resell your own stuff   (marketwatch.com) divider line 269
    More: Asinine, U.S. Supreme Court, iPhone, John Wiley & Sons, friend of the courts, Association of Colleges, American Library Association, Georgetown University Law School  
•       •       •

25831 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Oct 2012 at 8:36 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



269 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-06 11:20:54 PM

cman: There aint no way in hell SCOTUS would overturn the 1908 precedent. That would cause extreme chaos within our country and its economic system. SCOTUS wouldn't dare to do something that drastic


Also, GOOD LUCK trying to enforce it. There are literally hundreds of garage and yard sales every week, just in Orange County. How many nationwide. Hundreds of thousands? Millions?

Oh, wait, this would be a PERFECT job for an expanded TSA.

Because terrorists.
 
2012-10-06 11:25:37 PM
That sound you hear in the distance is a million pawn shop owners, thrift store operators, and antiques pickers organizing into a powerful lobby force.
 
2012-10-06 11:27:38 PM

thornhill: So what the publisher does, is print the textbook in black & white, uses a cheaper paper stock, and only uses soft covers.


Mostly they reduce the massive overhead they charge, because that market will not stand it.
 
2012-10-06 11:30:59 PM

ghostofreasonpast: That sound you hear in the distance is a million pawn shop owners, thrift store operators, and antiques pickers organizing into a powerful lobby force.


Don't forget the (legitimate) ebay and other online resellers. By which I mean not the scammers, so pretty much everyone else.
 
2012-10-06 11:33:17 PM

basemetal: [www.fwdailynews.com image 286x400]

Can't resell stuff? Don't like that idea a bit, not one bit.


Not that he ever ends up selling anything anyway. "This is worth ten times what I paid! I think I'll keep it! Now I'm broke again!"
 
2012-10-06 11:34:38 PM
There is absolutely zero chance we have to worry about this. It would be the last nail in the coffin of our current leadership, and they're not that stupid.
 
2012-10-06 11:36:16 PM
When are people finally going to get pissed off? And just as always, you will sit there on your 'puters and let the corporations and lawyers fark you in your ass with their 12" cock of authority. Then as long as you get your subsidies, welfare, and "entitlements" you basically shut the fark up and ask for more cock. You will buy what they say, and eat what they tell you.

When will this end? Freedom is in the toilet, we get raped before flying, and authority figures are throwing normal citizens around like we no longer have rights. And they get away with it. The TSA steals your money and computers RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU. They media and government encourages your neighbors to fear you and have you spy on each other. When was the last time you moved somewhere and all your new neighbors came over with cookies to meet the "new folks"?

When are people finally going to speak up? En Masse? Why is everyone just letting this shiat happen?

And finally, make sure to be a good American and make sure to keep voting for "politicians" instead of people that have the actual skills and understanding to even try to fix this mess we are all in. Listen to all the wonderful speeches and debates that were wrote and coreographed by their wonderful highly specialized staff. One of which is sure to have public psychology skills. Skills that work on YOU.

This was posted by a HUMAN that still believes in the original, honest American Dream he experienced when he was young. A time when the country was still UNITED because we actually were, and not TOLD TO BE by the media because it is the next "thing". A HUMAN that cries when he sees what the world's governments and corporations have done. A HUMAN that is well educated enough to know our environment is truly farkED and nothing will be done.

And it all seems to spawn to a single relation:

Money vs. What is right. It is not often when those two overlap.
 
2012-10-06 11:39:09 PM
RICO Act Violation?
www.mrsjanuary.com
 
2012-10-06 11:39:26 PM

A Shambling Mound: Fissile: Years ago I bought a computer that came bundled with Windows Office 2000. My employer required that I use Windows Office 2003 when I utilized my home computer for business tasks. My employer provided me with a licensed copy of Windows Office 2003 to install on my home computer. Now I had the disc for Office 2000 that was no longer installed on my computer, or any other computer for that matter. I put the Office 2000 disc up for sale on eBay, since the disc CAME BUNDLED WITH A COMPUTER THAT I PAID FOR. The auction was pulled 3 days later. I received a notice from eBay stating that as per Microsoft licensing agreements, I was not allowed to resell OEM Microsoft software.

Key difference here: You do not own that software and thus cannot re-sell it. It is licensed to you and that license specifically prohibits resale.

I sell used desktops and laptops on a scale large enough to attract Microsoft's attention. Let me tell you, navigating the vagaries of Windows licensing without being sued into bankruptcy is no mean feat. They actively troll my retail stores and place online orders in the hopes they can get an employee to violate licensing terms because in their eyes computers are either to be destroyed once the first owner is done with them or they want another $50 - $70 every time a box with a Windows Certificate of Authenticity attached is resold.

I think it should go without saying: F*ck them in the ear.


=============

Right. I understand that I purchased a license to install one copy of the software. That copy had been uninstalled. A new version of that software had been installed in its place, and the license fee for that new version was was paid.

Now let's say my employer had purchased a new computer for me that came bundled with Office 2003. Let's further assume that I retained my old computer which came bundled with Office 2000. Both licenses allowed for installation of one copy of the respective software. In this case, two copies of software were paid for, and two copies were installed.

That's not what happened. My employer paid for only a new copy of Office, not a new computer. The old copy of Office....license fee paid....was uninstalled, and the new copy....license fee paid.... was installed. In this case, I had two paid copies of Office, but only one was installed and being used. Now if I had sold that disc to someone else, it would have been the same for Microsoft. They received payment for one copy of Office 2000, and only one copy was installed under that license. They received payment for one copy of Office 2003 and only one copy was installed under that license. The only difference under this scenario is that I would have received a partial reimbursement for the license fee that I paid to Microsoft from the new license holder. No, you can't assume that the person who would have purchased the copy of Office 2000 would have purchased a Office 2003 if they were unable to obtain a copy of an older version.

The above is an example of pure greed on the part of Gates, and it's that petty corporate greed which pushed me over to the dark side of software piracy. I have no regrets. Fark 'em.
 
2012-10-06 11:41:46 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: There is absolutely zero chance we have to worry about this. It would be the last nail in the coffin of our current leadership, and they're not that stupid.


Really?
 
2012-10-06 11:46:00 PM
"Wiley, which admitted that it charged less for books sold abroad than it did in the U.S., sued him for copyright infringement."

I've got this fabulous idea... Ya know, instead of biatching about this now, why don't we sell things overseas for the same farking price as you do in the USA? Problem solved in this particular case!
 
2012-10-06 11:50:48 PM
Doesn't the "first sale" happen when the retailer buys it from the publisher/wholesaler? If so, wouldn't that make it illegal for retailers to sell anything?
 
2012-10-06 11:52:42 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: There is absolutely zero chance we have to worry about this. It would be the last nail in the coffin of our current leadership, and they're not that stupid.

Really?


Yeah, they like to pretend they're that stupid for the dolts who vote this way or that, but they wouldn't actually let this happen, because the shiat would fly. Enough of the intelligent people would get outraged beyond belief that it'd be all over.
 
2012-10-06 11:55:15 PM
In August 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld a lower court's ruling that anything that was manufactured overseas is not subject to the first-sale principle. Only American-made products or "copies manufactured domestically" were.

Then there is the old sticky hmmmmmm... this part was made in China, this part was made in Japan, this part was made in Taiwan, this part was made in India... huh? Who the fark do I owe what?
 
2012-10-06 11:58:38 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: dahmers love zombie: This would be unbelievable if upheld. Can you imagine a Honda dealership? "Yeah, we'll give you $2,000 trade-in value for your 2010 Accord.". "WTF?" "OK, don't take our offer -- you're not allowed to sell it at all now".

Actually, that may depend on where the car was built. Honda may be a Japanese company, but the car was manufactured here. So, if it's manufactured here, I can sell it again, right?

Of course, Honda will then claim that it was somehow NOT made here, but in Japan. Taken to its logical extreme, Honda would be operating here, but claiming that they are not for business purposes. And at that point, one has to ask whether they should be taxed as a domestic firm or not.


You do understand that Honda dealerships are not owned by Honda and are owned by independent dealers who make money on used car sales. Honda has a vested interest in people selling their used cars back to the dealership to purchase new cars...
 
2012-10-07 12:01:10 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: BraveNewCheneyWorld: There is absolutely zero chance we have to worry about this. It would be the last nail in the coffin of our current leadership, and they're not that stupid.

Really?

Yeah, they like to pretend they're that stupid for the dolts who vote this way or that, but they wouldn't actually let this happen, because the shiat would fly. Enough of the intelligent people would get outraged beyond belief that it'd be all over.


I'd say you're right, except for the very invasive physical search, background check, credit check, and interrogation I was required to submit to in order to take my last airline flight a year or two back. If you can make people submit to being fondled in public and interrogated, what the f**k is left? seriously, what indignity do you think is going to cause the great mob to rise up?

/when I say last, I mean it. Never. Ever. Again. Getting searched and having no right to say "get the f**k off me, s**thead!" isn't something I ever expected to experience, unless I was a criminal suspect, which I ain't.
 
2012-10-07 12:04:27 AM

KawaiiNot: What happened to common sense?


It isn't.....
 
2012-10-07 12:08:06 AM

MisterTweak: I'd say you're right, except for the very invasive physical search, background check, credit check, and interrogation I was required to submit to in order to take my last airline flight a year or two back. If you can make people submit to being fondled in public and interrogated, what the f**k is left? seriously, what indignity do you think is going to cause the great mob to rise up?


The difference is that flying isn't every day of everyone's life. You're right in the aspect that they're trying to make us accept this treatment as a frog in slowly boiling water, but this would be too much too fast.
 
2012-10-07 12:10:51 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: There is absolutely zero chance we have to worry about this. It would be the last nail in the coffin of our current leadership, and they're not that stupid.


================

Wouldn't be the first time such a "solution" was proposed.

"I would have the Government assign a lease of life to shoes and homes and machines, to all
products of manufacture, mining and agriculture, when they are first created, and they would
be sold and used within the term of their existence definitely known by the consumer. After
the allotted time had expired, these things would be legally "dead" and would be controlled
by the duly appointed governmental agency and destroyed if there is widespread
unemployment. New products would constantly be pouring forth from the factories and
marketplaces, to take the place of the obsolete, and the wheels of industry would be kept
going and employment regularized and assured for the masses."

Bernard London
 
2012-10-07 12:14:46 AM
I might consider voting Republican if they actually decide to get rid of all these damn laws and restrictions. I'm small govt in the sense that I want them off my ass and it would be a pretty sad day for America and capitalism if we lose the right to sell our property. Govt should be about helping the people not trying to screw us over.
 
2012-10-07 12:18:42 AM
mw3.wsj.net

10/10

Epic trolling.
 
2012-10-07 12:19:39 AM

Fissile: Bernard London


Just because it's a quote doesn't mean it's a thought of substance. The concept, when considering current manufacturing capacity, economics, and basic logic, is beyond asinine.
 
2012-10-07 12:21:11 AM

TheJoe03: I'm small govt in the sense that I want them off my ass and it would be a pretty sad day for America and capitalism if we lose the right to sell our property.


Republicans haven't been for small government in a long time, not when they're in office anyway... Campaign promises, that's another story.
 
2012-10-07 12:21:47 AM
1.bp.blogspot.com

ALL THINGS ISSUE FORTH FROM MONOLITH CORP AND WE ALONE CAN SELL! YOU MUST BUY AND BUY AND DISPOSE OF THAT WHICH YOU NO LONGER WANT! HARRUMPH!
 
2012-10-07 12:22:55 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: TheJoe03: I'm small govt in the sense that I want them off my ass and it would be a pretty sad day for America and capitalism if we lose the right to sell our property.

Republicans haven't been for small government in a long time, not when they're in office anyway... Campaign promises, that's another story.


That's why I used the word "actually".
 
2012-10-07 12:23:23 AM
uhm... Inherited items would not be covered by this, as if you inherit you are not the purchaser.
non watch Jewelry is not covered by copyrights.

but the cheap tobacco would be stopped, so it has that going for it.
 
rpm
2012-10-07 12:25:04 AM
Benjimin_Dover:
This applies to copyrighted items. Cars aren't copyrighted.

No, but the software you need for a modern car to work is.
 
rpm
2012-10-07 12:26:08 AM

madgordy: Jewelry is not covered by copyrights.


No, but the design on the back is
 
2012-10-07 12:30:36 AM

Oznog: They might have a thing over CUSTOMS allowing imports if they appear to be for resale outside the permitted area. IF that is a legally binding request.

However, if resale is allowed freely in defiance of regions, this is actually suckage for other countries. These guys get steep discounts in drugs, books, equipment, goods of all types, over US pricing. If they are legally able to just turn around and resell to the US, killing their US-sale cash cow, then the companies would ask themselves if taking an item that costs $10 to make, sells for $200 in the USA, but also sells for $15 in China only to find China ordered 3x more than they could possibly USE and are killing the US sales, that maybe they should start bringing up the China price to $150 or all the way to $200.

Bottom line being that these countries may have to pay US prices, and they can't, so basically they're cut off.


no

The US is a population of 300 million, the rest of the world is more than 6 billion, even if they never sold another book in the US they'd still make more money selling the book for 20 bucks a copy every where else.

The reason the price in these countries is 20 bucks is because that's the global market rate - ie the price they can charge before people pirate it and the gov looks the other way. In the US and other western nations the Gov is more likely to be favourable to campaign donations so you get laws to isolate from the global market rate and allow them to charge 200 bucks for a 10 dollar book.
 
2012-10-07 12:33:57 AM

GAT_00: Since banning resale would benefit corporations, as people would be forced to buy new products instead of used, I expect this will have 4 guaranteed votes banning resale from the Republicans on the court.


Nah, if you couldn't resell, you wouldn't buy new stuff as often.
 
2012-10-07 12:35:04 AM

KawaiiNot: What happened to common sense?


It's hanging out with the $1.2 million a corporation feels entitled to.
 
2012-10-07 12:40:12 AM

Benjimin_Dover: Grand_Moff_Joseph: dahmers love zombie: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Considering that 9/10 items on store shelves in America (including virtually 100% of electronic/technology related products) are made outside the USA, customers here would be unable to resell nearly everything they ever buy.

Hey...wouldn't that boost the economy? I mean, apart from every flea market, auction house, and eBay?

Well, that would put every single independent used car lot out of business overnight, as they'd never have any cars to sell.

This applies to copyrighted items. Cars aren't copyrighted.


If SCOTUS lets this by, cars will be copyrighted by Christmas time, trust me.
 
2012-10-07 12:43:11 AM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Fissile: Bernard London

Just because it's a quote doesn't mean it's a thought of substance. The concept, when considering current manufacturing capacity, economics, and basic logic, is beyond asinine.


==========

Different method, but the same objective of the current proposal: Destruction of secondary and tertiary markets for consumer goods.
 
2012-10-07 12:55:05 AM

ZeroCorpse: Honestly... What are you going to do? Have cops follow up on fliers, classified ads...


This happens.
 
2012-10-07 12:55:52 AM

ZAZ: Here is the question the court has agreed to answer:How do Section 602(a)(1) of the Copyright Act, which prohibits the importation of a work without the authority of the copyright's owner, and Section 109(a) of the Copyright Act, which allows the owner of a copy "lawfully made under this title" to sell or otherwise dispose of the copy without the copyright owner's permission, apply to a copy that was made and legally acquired abroad and then imported into the United States?So stop worrying about your made-in-China lead lollipops. This only affects items acquired overseas.


A: Section 602(a)(1) does not apply. By offering to sell his goods, the copyright's owner gave implicit permission for his works to be imported - assuming a legal transaction occured. Section 109(a) applies as it always has: you bought it, you own it - again, assuming a legal transaction and the item is not other wise prohibited to own in the United States.

Just a guess. Off to the Holidayy Inn Express I go!
 
2012-10-07 12:57:54 AM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Benjimin_Dover: Grand_Moff_Joseph: dahmers love zombie: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Considering that 9/10 items on store shelves in America (including virtually 100% of electronic/technology related products) are made outside the USA, customers here would be unable to resell nearly everything they ever buy.

Hey...wouldn't that boost the economy? I mean, apart from every flea market, auction house, and eBay?

Well, that would put every single independent used car lot out of business overnight, as they'd never have any cars to sell.

This applies to copyrighted items. Cars aren't copyrighted.

If SCOTUS lets this by, cars will be copyrighted by Christmas time, trust me.


It applies to Copyrighted items PURCHASED overseas, imported to the US and re-sold.

Goddamn...you people need to read some shiat...

Nobody is going to be raiding your yard-sale or hauling you off to jail for putting your mountain bike on Craigslist.
 
2012-10-07 01:01:30 AM
if the Scotus find against this woman it will likely written in very very specific terms to keep it from being a dangerous precedent.

I honestly feel though they will find in favor of the young woman. The damage potential if they do not is incalculable Ebay and criags list would be dead , Amazon would take a heavy blow. Garage sales would be illegal as would for the most part be flea markets.

and thats just for starters.
 
2012-10-07 01:02:22 AM
Hell, the only reason this is coming up, is because the government can't figure out how to
TAX this "industry" (garage sales). I know some places around town that have a "sale"
every weekend. Easy under the table income. Once the government figures out a way
to tax it, then "they" will be happy.
 
2012-10-07 01:06:26 AM

grimlock1972: if the Scotus find against this woman it will likely written in very very specific terms to keep it from being a dangerous precedent.

I honestly feel though they will find in favor of the young woman. The damage potential if they do not is incalculable Ebay and criags list would be dead , Amazon would take a heavy blow. Garage sales would be illegal as would for the most part be flea markets.

and thats just for starters.


Well fear not. With the 12 million high paying jobs Romney is going to give us, we can afford to buy new from now on.

*eagle tear*
 
2012-10-07 01:07:28 AM
example fifteenbajillion of why legal articles should be written by people with understanding of the law.

And the court should uphold the lower courts on this.
 
2012-10-07 01:08:35 AM
I proudly display my international edition textbooks in class with the labels that say "not to be imported to the United States" Fark em. I did look up the law before I bought my first book, however.

Genetics, 9th ed- $125 domestic. Genetics, 8th edition international- 8 bucks. 95%+ the same. Don't remember how much 9th ed was, I got through.

In many cases, the international editions may not be in color, are softcover, or may have fewer pictures. Other times, they are damn near unchanged except for the cover. I only wish I could do that with all my books.
 
2012-10-07 01:11:30 AM

cman: DamnYankees: The case stems from Supap Kirtsaeng's college experience. A native of Thailand, Kirtsaeng came to the U.S. in 1997 to study at Cornell University. When he discovered that his textbooks, produced by Wiley, were substantially cheaper to buy in Thailand than they were in Ithaca, N.Y., he rallied his Thai relatives to buy the books and ship them to him in the U.S.

He then sold them on eBay, making upwards of $1.2 million, according to court documents.

It's called arbitrage. Good for this kid for figuring it out. The idea that doing this would become illegal, assuming we have a freed trade agreement with the other country, it utterly biatchcakes.

If it were a case about pharmaceuticals and chemicals there would be a valid point as those should be held at a higher standard. But books?


Regardless if it is pharmaceuticals, cars, books, music, anything else the reasoning is the same. The corporations have government establish conditions under which they may charge very high prices for their goods in the US. The problem is they haven't convinced all governments to create these conditions thus there are free(r) markets around the world where they must compete for customers. In those markets prices are lower for the same goods. They then need government in the USA to block the secondary importation of these same goods to maintain their artificially high profit margins.

If the USA did not operate under a corporatist economic model, but instead a free market model, there would be no profit in importing goods from other countries. It is only because of the artificial price supports in the USA that there is any money in doing so.
 
2012-10-07 01:14:10 AM
File off the country of origin and plead ignorance.
 
2012-10-07 01:17:00 AM
Hagenhatesyouall
THIS is truly a SCOTUS Derp test, if there EVER was one!
[Derp pic]
Can't wait to see if they pass.

Having a five-four vote for this seems unlikely. It Would be a wonderful test to see what members want to write a non-ideological, corporate love letter to the American public.
 
Esn
2012-10-07 01:17:03 AM

ZeroCorpse: Here's my answer:

Stop me.


No, really. I dare you. Stop me.

Not just me. Stop the millions of other Americans selling their stuff on Craigslist, or in the classifieds, or by putting up a sign in the local grocery store.

Stop us. We double-dog dare you.

Honestly... What are you going to do? Have cops follow up on fliers, classified ads, garage sales, yard sales, resale shops, Goodwill stores, and used book stores?

Are you going to have resale gestapo locking people up or fining us for selling "contraband" iPods and textbooks and Xbox 360s?

Do you remember the "war on drugs" and how that worked out for the justice system and prison system?

Yeah... So I f♥cking DARE you to stop me from selling my PSP or my copy of Red Dead Redemption or my Android phone. Try it. See how much of a mess you get on your hands.


You don't know the history of the Soviet legal system, I see. The principle is as follows: make unenforceable laws that make just about every citizen a criminal. Of course nobody is going to take them seriously, neither the police nor the public. But if there is somebody who you want "disappeared", you have a legal reason to put them in jail.

That's how this is going to work.
 
2012-10-07 01:17:26 AM

sprgrss: example fifteenbajillion of why legal articles should be written by people with understanding of the law.

And the court should uphold the lower courts on this.


Oh thank god somebody else sees it!!

this thread is making me feel likes it's bizarro day on Fark or something. Or there's some joke I'm not in on... "Hey, let's greenlight this 100% troll article about the gub'mint taking your stuff and everybody get all serious and wadded up about it. People that don't know it's a joke will FREAK OUT!!! Ha!!"

Oh... and...

Agreed... Defendant is FARKed.
 
2012-10-07 01:17:56 AM

dustman81: cman: There aint no way in hell SCOTUS would overturn the 1908 precedent. That would cause extreme chaos within our country and its economic system. SCOTUS wouldn't dare to do something that drastic

Even, if they did, which is unlikely, I don't see how it could be enforced. Not to mention companies like eBay and Craigslist would be destroyed.


F*ck that, every swap meet and antique store would go under. A lot of people survive on buying crap, cleaning it up and selling it at a slight markup. Overturning the 1908 ruling would be the final deathblow to our economy.
 
2012-10-07 01:23:09 AM

Benjimin_Dover: Grand_Moff_Joseph: dahmers love zombie: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Considering that 9/10 items on store shelves in America (including virtually 100% of electronic/technology related products) are made outside the USA, customers here would be unable to resell nearly everything they ever buy.

Hey...wouldn't that boost the economy? I mean, apart from every flea market, auction house, and eBay?

Well, that would put every single independent used car lot out of business overnight, as they'd never have any cars to sell.

This applies to copyrighted items. Cars aren't copyrighted.


Ask the airbrush store owner tom davidson about cars being copywritten. He was selling black outlines of popular cars. No logos, no names, just a black iron on outline and several car companies "may have" contacted him about the shape of the cars being copy write protected and stopped him from selling his product.
 
2012-10-07 01:23:22 AM
fark this shiat. This is so ridiculous I felt like I was suddenly reading The Onion.
 
2012-10-07 01:23:29 AM

thornhill: The case stems from Supap Kirtsaeng's college experience. A native of Thailand, Kirtsaeng came to the U.S. in 1997 to study at Cornell University. When he discovered that his textbooks, produced by Wiley, were substantially cheaper to buy in Thailand than they were in Ithaca, N.Y., he rallied his Thai relatives to buy the books and ship them to him in the U.S.

While it's a completely separate issue, what is being overlooked is that most U.S. textbooks are sold overseas for 50% to 75% less than the U.S. MSRP.

Many countries want to use our textbooks, but they cannot afford the U.S. price. So what the publisher does, is print the textbook in black & white, uses a cheaper paper stock, and only uses soft covers. The content is 100% the same. If you put the same page from the U.S. version next to the international version, they'd be identical except that the international version is in black & white.

I'm a grad student and recently discovered this; I have saved a fortune buying the international version of textbooks that I need for class.

The obvious point, is that the textbook industry has the power to easily slash the cost of textbooks. Talk about something that demands government regulation.


It's government regulation and interference that got it this way in the first place. If they had to compete for text book sales there would be cheaper options. Rich kids could by the full color editions while everyone else got the B&W editions.
 
Displayed 50 of 269 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report