The Internet has always been a haven for bargain hunters, providing cut-rate costs on most consumer products compared to major store-based retailers. The Internet has always been able to sell items at lower prices, in part, due to its ability to find the cheapest source for an item across the world, rather than being restricted to one supplier.

This has especially been a boon to us as college students, since we are forced to buy expensive textbooks that can cost up to several hundred dollars when purchased through our university bookstores. But through the Internet, you can save even up to 75 percent on required textbooks.

However, depending on a Supreme Court ruling, online retailers, like eBay, may be restricted in their ability to look for cheaper products abroad.

On Monday, the Supreme Court heard the opening arguments from the lawyers representing their clients in the international copyright case Kirtsaeng vs. Wiley. Textbook publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc. is suing Supap Kirtsaeng, a graduate student in mathematics at the University of South California, for selling international copies of textbooks in the United States through online reseller eBay. Kirtsaeng funded his graduate education in the States by having his relatives in Thailand purchase international versions of American textbooks, which he then sold for a profit in America. In total, he sold over $900,000 worth of textbooks, gaining over $100,000 in profit.

This is not the first time a similar case has appeared before the Supreme Court. In 2010, Costco clashed with Swiss watchmaker Omega in a similar dispute, which left the Supreme Court in a 4-4 deadlock. The first-sale legal doctrine states that a product that has been copyrighted in America can be sold by the owner without the copyright owner’s approval. This law has not only allowed for millions of Americans to make some extra cash by selling their old belongings, but has much more far reaching implications. Without it, libraries and other renting and loaning services would come under fire from manufactures and publishers.

In 1998, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the doctrine applied to American goods sold overseas, which means people could bring those products back into the United States and sell them.

But since the international versions of the textbooks are manufactured overseas, the New York based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that first-sale did not apply and awarded Wiley $600,000 in damages.

The movie and music industry and major publishers back this decision, citing how allowing Kirtsaeng’s actions would adversely affect their business in the states. However, I feel these industries have lost some of their credibility after some of their more ludicrous lawsuits involving their copyrights; in 2005, the Recording Industry of Association of America sued a recently deceased woman for downloading over 800 songs illegally.

A large reason why American versions of textbooks cost so much more than their international counterparts is the high cost of the patent and copyright process here in the United States. This is only further supported and propagated by manufacturers constantly seeking copyright-related lawsuits.

Conversely, Kirtsaeng is backed by retail giants, such as Costco and eBay, who offer similarly internationally acquired or “gray-market” products. Also joining them are museums and art galleries who are afraid an adverse ruling would affect their ability to showcase the work of international artists.

It is in our best interests, as college students, to support a favorable decision for Kirtsaeng, as the cost of higher education rises, we need to protect what little savings we can afford.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the case by the summer of 2013.

Brian is a junior in Engineering. He can be reached at [email protected].