Jai heavenly father, we come to you under the name of Jesus. We thank you for this day. We thank you for the class we are about to have. God, I just pray that as Pastor Deepika teaches all my classmates and myself, God, I pray that you'll help us to open our mind and heart and listen and understand the deep truths that are in the Bible. I pray for all my classmates who are about to join. God, I just pray that you'll give us all good Wi-Fi connections and you'll help us to understand the Holy Spirit. You'll be our teacher. You'll be our guide and help us to learn something new from the class today and to live life for your glory, Jesus. We give you all the glory and honour in Jesus' name. We pray. I didn't realise it was not on. Yeah, good morning. We'll begin today with John chapter 6. We'll cover chapter 6 and 7 today. That's the plan. They are rather lengthy, so there's a lot of information in these chapters, but we'll try to cover as much as possible. So we'll begin. If we can have one of us read out verses 1 to 4 of chapter 6, we'll get started. So if we can have someone read out John chapter 6 verses 1 to 4. After this thing just went over the sea of Galilee, which is the sea of Tiberia, then I'll get much, much to follow the people, because they saw the time which he performed on those who were in the sea. And Jesus went up on the mountain, and there he started with his disciples. Now, the part of a piece of the deal was here. Then Jesus lifted up his eyes and seen a good man with him coming towards him to pray to Jesus. We'll look at these verses later. A lot of static on the line. Okay, yeah. We had Brother Collins read out for us verses 1 to 4. We see that Jesus is on the far shore of the sea of Galilee, and there's a large crowd that comes to the mountainside to see him, to listen to him. And just so that we have a clearer background regarding this, maybe we would need to go to Luke chapter 9 verses 10 to 11, where we get a little more background regarding why they are over here on this mountainside on the far shore of Galilee right now. So, if we can also have someone read out for us, Luke chapter 9 verses 10 to 11, just to get a little more background information regarding the setting of this particular passage. Luke 9, 10 to 11, please. Yeah. So, we see that this event takes place immediately after the mission trip on which Jesus sent the disciples. So, he tells them to go into the different towns and villages and tell people to repent because the kingdom of God is near. He gives them the authority to perform signs and wonders. And so, the disciples have now come back, very excited. You know, in fact, they say in Luke that even the demons are responding to us. And so, they are very happy with the good progress that they could make during the mission trip. And obviously, they must be rather tired now because they would have traveled on foot from place to place, would have had many sleepless nights.  So, this was supposed to be a private time for Jesus and his disciples. So, he takes them away to the mountainside where they can all just spend some time together and rest. But the crowds are so eager, the crowds are so, you know, longing to hear from him and to see more miracles that the crowd searches for them and comes over here to this place where they are trying to get some private time. And we also notice in verse 4, it says, the Jewish Passover festival was near. So, because the Passover festival was nearing, there must be a lot of pilgrims as well who would have come. So, this crowd is made up of the locals as well as people from outside who are very curious to see this Jesus and, you know, watch the miracles that he does. And so, we have this large crowd searching him out and, you know, locating him over here near the mountainside. So, Jesus would have in fact preferred it if he could have spent some quiet time with his disciples, you know, going over all the report of the mission trip, you know, encouraging them, teaching them new things. So, that was lost. They could not have that quiet time together. But it says that, you know, it says in Luke that he shows them great compassion even though they have interrupted what he had planned. He is kind to them and he ministers to them. So this is the background of what follows. So, in Luke, we get to know that he spends a lot of time teaching them.  So, all of this ministry goes on and so it finally becomes very late in the day and the crowd has no food left because whatever they have brought along with them, has run out and so now at this point of time, the parent story begins. So, we see verse 5 onwards, Jesus addressing the needs of the crowd. So, if we can have someone read out for us, verses 5, 6 and 7 please. We are in John chapter 6. If we can have someone read out for us, verses 5, 6 and 7 please. John chapter 6, please go ahead. John chapter 6 verse 5 to 7, then Jesus lifted up his eyes and seen a great multitude coming to work him. He said to Philip, where shall we buy bread that this may eat? But this is said to test him for he himself knew what he would do. Philip answered him, 200 dinary worth of bread is not sufficient for them that every one of them may have. Okay, so the details about the ministry that he does, the preaching that he does, the healing that happens, all of that is not mentioned here. John just directly gets into the event which takes place immediately after the teaching and the healing. So, there's this large crowd which is waiting over there and they have no food. So, now he asks Philip. Philip and Andrew and Peter are all from this region. They're all from the Bethsaida region. So, they would be familiar with places where you can buy bread and all of that. But of course, here in this situation where you have such a large crowd, even if they went to get the food supplies, even if they had the money for that much of food supplies, you know, they probably would not, you know, the people providing the food supplies probably would not have enough for such a large crowd. So, it says very clearly in verse 6, he asked this only to test him. So, Jesus tests Philip when he asks, where shall we buy bread? So, Jesus waits to see how Philip will respond. Now, we have to keep in mind that these disciples have just come back victoriously from a mission trip where even the demons had to flee when the name of Jesus was taken up. So, they have seen the power of God at work. God has used their hands, their feet, their mouths to deliver people, to heal people. They have come back from a highly successful mission trip. And now Jesus is bringing a test and he says to Philip, what do we do? Where can we buy bread for these people? And Philip temporarily forgets all that has happened during the mission trip and he answers in the natural. And he says, I mean, even if we had half a year's wages and we could purchase enough bread for all of them, you know, it would not be sufficient because the number of people here are so large that even half a year's wages would actually not be sufficient. So, after this victorious mission trip, this is Philip's response. And this can happen to us in our own Christian walk. You know, there are times when we have great victory. We have successfully fought the battle. We have walked in faith. We have stood on what Jesus said and we have claimed the victory that is ours. So, the Lord is pleased with what we have done. But now we should not get inflated by that victory and forget the principles, you know, that we held on to during that time of battle. So, immediately after the battle, after a grand victory, there is a chance, there is a likelihood that we may forget the lessons that we have learned and revert back into our own natural thinking, which is what happened over here. So, if Philip was still, you know, thinking along the lines that he had been during the mission trip, he would have probably answered very differently. He probably would have said, let's look at maybe another verse which can kind of throw light on this. In one of the other, in Luke chapter 9, you know, which we referred to earlier, we get to know a little bit about their mission trip, something that Jesus tells them about how they should conduct that trip. So, if maybe we can have someone read out for us, Luke chapter 9 verses 3 to 5. Luke chapter 9 verses 3 to 5, please. Luke chapter 9 verse 3 to 6. And he said to them, take nothing for the journey, neither starve. Yeah, if we can have someone else read out, because there seems to be some kind of feedback, audio feedback, when Brother Subashish writes to read out. So, if we can have someone else read out, Luke chapter 9 verses 3 to 5, please. Then he called his 12 disciples to give them power and authority over all the demons and to cure diseases. He sent them to preach the kingdom of God and to heal the sick. And he said to them, take nothing for the journey, neither starve, nor bags, nor bread, nor money, and do not have two tonics apiece. Yeah. So, okay, here we see that Jesus specifically tells them, when you go on your mission trip, do not take extra food with you. Do not take money with you. Do not take any kind of supplies with you, because it's going to be a faith mission trip, where you will be waiting upon the Lord to provide. So, they have actually done an exercise in faith when they went out on that mission trip, there would have been homes that they would have gone to where people were not willing to receive them, because that's what it says in the next two verses in Luke chapter 9 verses 4 and 5. It talks about how some people will not welcome them and when they would have to just leave that town and go away to the next town. So, they have been through those experiences and God has provided for them throughout all of that. So, Philip, maybe Jesus was expecting Philip to answer differently. You know, Philip, the right answer which Philip should have given would have been, we saw what the Lord has done during the mission trip. We saw how God provided for all our needs and so now Jesus, even as this crowd is sitting over here, I'm sure in the same way God will provide for us now as well. That probably would have been the response that Jesus was expecting from Philip. But Philip has forgotten all that has happened during the mission trip and the way God has provided and so now he just answers in the natural and he says, even if he had half a year's wages, that large amount would not be enough to even buy one bite for each person. In fact, we would be able to buy only one bite for each person is what he says. Then we have another little bit of dialogue happening in verses 8 to 11. If we can read out that as well, please. Verses 8 to 11. We are in John chapter 6 verses 8 to 11. One of his disciples, Andrew Simon, Peter's brother said to him, there is a red here who has five burly loves and two small fish. But what are they among so many? Then Jesus said, make the people sit down. Now there was much grass in the place so the man sat down in number about 5,000 and Jesus took the loves and when he had given thanks, he distributed them to the disciples and the disciples to those sitting down and likewise of the fish as much as they wanted. Yes, thanks a lot, Zalita B for reading out for us. It helps a lot. So here we see in these verses that one boy who is there in the group is willing to offer whatever he has to help out with the food need. So he comes forward and he says that he has five burly loves and two fish with him which he is willing to share. But then of course the crowd is so large that even half a year's wages would not be enough to feed them and so this is rather a small amount. So Andrew says, how far will they go among so many? And just to note down here, these are barley loves which this boy has with him. Barley was something eaten by the people who are not very well off. It was not a very tasty grain for them at that point of time. So this boy is obviously not from a very wealthy background. He probably belongs to the poorer class and yet whatever little he has, he is willing to share that with others and that is a good attitude to have because Jesus takes that. So nobody else comes forward and offers anything. This is the only offer and Jesus takes that. He takes it and he says, fine, let everyone sit down and then it says in verse 11, Jesus then took those loaves, those barley loaves which are not exactly luxurious food. He takes it, he gives thanks and he begins to distribute those five loaves and those two fish to the entire crowd. And as it is being distributed by the disciples, it just keeps multiplying. It doesn't run out. So what do we learn from this? We see a few things here, the attitude of this boy. He was not very well to do. He didn't really have anything fancy to offer but whatever little he had, he was willing to give it and then what does Jesus do with that? The Lord takes that, gives thanks for it and distributes it. So we may not have much but whatever we do have, if we are willingly ready to offer that to the Lord with thanksgiving, Jesus does that. Here we see Jesus acting out an act of faith. All he has in his hands are five loaves and two fish but he gives thanks to that confidently believing that God the Father will do whatever is required with whatever is available at hand and he will satisfy the crowd. So Jesus believes that and so with that faith, Jesus says thank you to the Lord and starts distributing it. So that can be our own attitude if we are involved in ministry. Maybe we are not the people with the greatest talents or the greatest skills. Maybe we don't have as much finances as the other organizations and ministries or we may just be someone who is in the secular field. We work at an office or we work at a school, wherever we are serving, we may feel that we are not really the best equipped people but God always works with whatever is at hand. So if you are the only believer over there in that particular place where God has placed you, then you are what is at hand and God will use what is at hand if it is offered to him willingly. So whatever you have, whatever skills you have, you take that and you say Lord right now this is what is available. I am all there is over here. I am the only believer in this place and these are my talents. Not very great but whatever I have I am willing to use it and if we thankfully offer it to the Lord trusting him to use it he will use you to be a blessing in that place. It will not matter how limited those skills are. You may not be the next Billy Graham but that will not matter because you see God takes whatever is at hand that whatever has been willingly offered to him that he takes it and he multiplies it and makes sure that that will meet the needs of the people that God is sending to you. So yours may be a small ministry. Maybe your finances are limited. Maybe your skills are limited but the people who are being sent to you by God they will receive what they need. Whatever you have in your hands will be sufficient to meet their requirements. So we never have to doubt that God can take what we are offering and make it serve his purposes.  So here we see that God has deliberately placed you in a certain situation with certain skills and though in the eyes of the world you may not really have sufficient resources God will take that little because you are acting in faith and you are acting with gratitude that whatever you have is adequate for the situation.  So whatever the Lord does he does it in our lives deliberately. It's not that just accidentally you ended up with the skills that you have. No, a skill set which you possess has been deliberately given to you by the Lord and the setting in which he has placed you in a place maybe where you don't really have the support of other believers. Maybe a place where you don't really have open doors which are wide open for you to minister and help people and serve people. God has deliberately placed you in those situations with those particular limited skills because he knows that it will give you a chance to act in greater faith. Like Jesus you can take that bold step and say thank you Lord I know that what I am holding in my hands is sufficient. I will be able to fulfill your purposes in this place and when we have step out in faith in that way that little that we have will prove sufficient that's the lesson that comes across over here through this passage. There's more to this lesson which we see in the next two verses. So yes, if we can have someone read out for us verses 12 and 13 please verses 12 and 13. So when they were built I'm really grateful to the two of you. Thank you so much. Brother Subashish our audio seems to be clear right now. There's no audio feedback. So yes brother you can go ahead. So when they were filled he said to his disciples gather up the fragments that remain so that nothing is lost. Therefore they gather them up and fill 12 baskets with the fragments of five burly lobes which are left over by those who had didn't. Yeah. So we see another lesson coming through here. Jesus says you know we placed the bread in front of all the small groups which were sitting there to eat. So you know they would have placed a certain amount of bread and a certain amount of fish in front of each group. So they have all eaten all the groups have eaten to their hearts content and now you still have a lot of bread and fish left over. Why? Where was the need for this surplus? I mean God is perfect at calculations. He knows exactly how many people there are. He knows exactly how much each of them is going to consume. So maybe he could have produced the exact amount, required amount. But here we see that God arranges for a surplus of 12 baskets. See they're able to get whatever is left over is filling up 12 baskets. Why the great surplus? I think it is just God showing that when he wishes to provide this is how he provides. He is generous. There are no limits to what he can do. So when you are in that ministry situation where you are working in some place which is very difficult to access the people there are not responding very well to the gospel and you don't have much finances to be able to take up maybe large projects and things like that. Even if you're in that place and you just like Jesus you take what little you have and you say thank you Lord and you begin to use that in that place God can do such a great work that not only are the needs of that particular group met but there would be a surplus left over. That is the lesson that God is trying to bring out because if you remember everything that Jesus is doing he is doing it as a sign to show who he is what kind of a father he represents what he wishes to do for people these are all signs indicating a lesson indicating something very clearly and so these signs are signs even for us the readers today so we can learn from these things and we can confidently minister wherever we are you may just be a school teacher working in some secular school but whatever you have in your hands it will be sufficient for you to minister to those children academically minister to them also give them a word of encouragement about what Christ can do in their lives you will be able to meet the needs of those children and moreover there would be a surplus beyond what you expected so those are the lessons which come across through this event the next recorded event is the people's response to what has happened the people are amazed that five loaves led to a left over surplus of 12 baskets now that really is quite a miracle so now what happens we see the response of the people if we could have someone read out for us versus 14 and 15 14, 15 then those men when they had seen the sign that Jesus did said this is truly the prophet who has come into the world therefore when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king he departed again to the mountain by himself alone yeah so the response of the people is that here we have someone who can supply bread in this manner and so it reminds them of Moses who also supplied them with Mana and so and moreover Moses had said in Deutronomy 18 verses 15 to 18 that one day God would raise up another prophet like me and so they make the connection and they tell themselves oh this is like another Moses this is like the other prophet which Moses had told us about so let us make him our king because then he can supply us with all our material needs and when Jesus sees that they are almost ready to forcibly make him king he withdraws into the mountain by himself because that is not his mission that is not why he came there will be a time when he will come as king and he will sit on the throne but right now he has come as the Lamb of God that is his current mission and so Jesus withdraws from them after this we come to another event so now it is quite late in the evening and now the disciples decide to take a boat and cross over to the other side and Jesus does not join them in the boat he says that he will come later and so we see that event being described over here so maybe we can read out verses 16 up to verse 21 please all the way from 16 up to verse 21 now when evening came his disciples went down to the sea got into the boat and went over the sea toward Kappanam and it was already dark and Jesus had not come to them then the sea arose because a great wind was blowing so when they had rode about 3 and 4 miles they saw Jesus walking on the sea and drawing near to the boat and they were afraid but he said to them it is I do not be afraid then they willingly willingly received him into the boat and immediately the boat was at the land where they were going yeah now something about the geographical location of this lake cost all these storms on this lake so this was explained in some great detail in some background commentary but how you would have winds coming from two different directions and so when it used to create some kind of don't remember if it was a high pressure area or a low pressure area something to do the winds and I am very bad at geography but anyway it would lead to constant storms respectively on this lake so this was something that used to occur quite frequently and it said in the commentary that these storms could be so violent that you know if the boat was a smaller boat it could even get overturned so this was a serious matter so in the middle of this storm we have Jesus approaching them on the waters and obviously because people generally do not walk on water the disciples assume that it is some kind of a spirit or some kind of a ghost and they are rather afraid but then Jesus assures them it is me so you don't need to be afraid then they bring him into the boat and then we see it says immediately the boat reached the shore where they were heading on other occasions in the other gospels we see that Jesus speaks to the storm stills here he does not speak to the storm the storm continues but they just are teleported right from the middle of the lake to their destination in a matter of seconds so I mean all I mean you know all this incident all these events which are recorded over here in the gospels each of them is trying to teach us something so the point that is being made over here is that for us what looks like an possibility what looks like a life ending storm from God's perspective he's got multiple options on how to handle it all is looking for from our side is faith so for us looking at it from our end we would think my goodness we are in deep trouble I mean this is an impossible situation and we are in a small boat no way can we survive is what maybe we would think but then God who is sitting on his throne he looks at the storm he looks at the small boat he looks at the helpless people and he's got multiple options on how to handle the situation all he's waiting for is that response of faith if we stand in faith then he will choose how to handle the situation he may speak to the storm and ask it to be still or he may just simply take you to destination where you're meant to go safely you know we are with the storm still raging so God can work in multiple ways all that's actually required from us is faith that he will come through for us that when we cry out to him he will hear and answer us so the next day they are now on the opposite side of the lake and the crowd comes back once again and here we just have one comment being made you know that is in verse 26 and 27 and this leads to a long conversation about Jesus saying I am the bread of life and all of that so in verses 26 if we could have someone read out just verses 26 and 27 please answer them and say most assuredly I said to you you seek me not because you saw the signs but because you ate the lobes and were filled do not labour for the food which perishes but for the food which endures everlasting life which the Son of Man will give you because God the Father has set his seal on him so the reason the crowd comes back now is because of the sign which they saw a little earlier where they saw the food being multiplied miraculously so now Jesus says to them you know don't come to me just for material things you know there are bigger things at stake which is what he says over here in verse 27 do not work for food that spoils but for food that endures to eternal life in other words Jesus seems to be indicating the words I speak the message which I am teaching about the kingdom that is more important than the physical food which I can provide so if you are pursuing that if you are pursuing eternal life then that can actually last you for eternity on the other hand if all you have on your mind is getting physical food out of me that food will get spoiled after a while so that's just something temporary so here Jesus tells them you need to pursue eternal things I am very sorry you need to pursue eternal things is what the Lord says here so then when Jesus says this to them their question is this if we can have someone read out verses 28 and 29 then this said to him what shall we do that we may work the works of God and Jesus answered and said to them this is the work of God that you believe in him whom he sent exactly so here so they say okay fine you are telling us to pursue eternal things so okay fine what should we do then or what must we do the works God requires and Jesus says the first thing that you are supposed to do is believe in me you know whom God has sent so the very first work of God is not you know immediately going out into the nearest town and start preaching the gospel the first work that is expected of us is not to go and perform miracles the very first work is believing in him placing our trust and faith in him that is the starting point everything else follows flows out of that faith so the very first step that God requires of us the greatest work that God requires of us is not so much our ministry but our faith faith in doing the things that he has called us to do faith also in sense of obedience where we willingly just submit to whatever he is asking of us so when you have that kind of a obedience and that kind of a submission and that kind of a trust in him ministry automatically follows I mean God will bring to us the people whom he wants us to minister to and they will get minister to whatever we have in our hands will be sufficient first step the very first work of God which he wants is not really a work it's not really an action it is rather trust so once we have that attitude of complete obedience and trust and submission everything else just flows out of that so this is one very valuable learning that actually comes through to us you know from this passage and then Jesus goes on to say in verses 32 and 33 yeah if we can just read out verses 32 and 33 please then Jesus said to them most assuredly I say to you Moses did not give you the bread from heaven but my father gives you the true bread from heaven for the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the whole so Jesus you know says I mean you are comparing me with Moses you are saying that Moses provided manna and in the same way you want me to provide you with bread but he points out Moses did not really give you bread from heaven yes it's true that the manna fell down from the skies but this was not heavenly bread in the sense it was something which got spoiled after a while it could only provide and sustain temporarily and moreover the people who ate this manna they went on to die a physical death you know at the end of their lives so on the other hand the bread which I have come to give that is going to be eternal because that will not perish that will give you an eternal life that will take you into you know eternity to be with God always so he says that is why Jesus says in verse 35 he says I am the bread of life this is not temporary bread this is not like that manna which could you know gets spoiled after a while this is Jesus he says I am the bread of life that is why if anyone comes to me he says they will never go hungry and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty because he will be there to take care of every spiritual need that they have and once your spiritual needs are met and you are standing strong in the Lord the material needs I mean they get fulfilled automatically because you know that's what Jesus says right in Matthew chapter 6 verse 33 seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness and as long as your focus is on that all these things will be added unto you I mean it will automatically be added unto you so that is what he says whoever comes to me will never go hungry and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty because you know you have placed your spiritual needs first and you are coming to me to have those fulfilled and once you are strong in me the rest of the things will be added unto you anyway you know because the heavenly father knows what you require so these are the learnings that Jesus brings across and then he goes on to make some important points regarding in what sense he is the bread of life and what should be their approach to this bread of life so if we can have someone read out for us verses 53 to 57 yeah 53 to 57 then Jesus said to them most assuredly I say to you unless you eat the place of the son of man and drink his blood you will live in this whoever eats my place and drinks my blood has eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day for my place is food indeed and my blood is drink indeed you eat my place and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him as the Libby father sent me and I live because of the father so he who fits on me will live because of me yeah so now there are people in the crowd who probably understand what Jesus is saying and then there are those who misunderstand we have in verse 52 you know some of the Jews they say how can this man give us his flesh to eat so they are taking the words literally as though Jesus is saying they should feed on his physical flesh so yes there are some who misunderstand but then there are others who actually understand what he is saying because he was using wording which would have been familiar to them you know the metaphor there is a metaphor in their Hebrew language which talks about eating and drinking and over there it is not referring to someone consuming human flesh it is saying whatever I am speaking to you absorb it into your innermost being so in that sense you are literally eating and drinking what the rabbi is teaching so if you have a rabbi who is sharing God's word and explaining the truths to you you literally eat and you drink what is being offered to you when we eat and drink what happens the food and the water it literally gets inside us it gets absorbed into our very core every single cell of the human body absorbs that water you know draws the nutrients out of that food it becomes a part of us right so in that sense you know when a rabbi would come and teach the word of God the audience was expected to literally eat and drink of it where whatever has been taught literally becomes a part of them becomes a part of their very inner core now here Jesus is saying I am literally the teaching the word that you need you literally eat me and you drink me in the sense you know all that I am saying to you believe it and not just believe in my words but believe in me that I am from the Father that I am divine that I am the Messiah who has been sent from heaven to you so accept that to an extent you know where in your actions in your choices you start showing that you believe in me and have submitted to me because when you do that you are literally absorbing me into your into the very core of your being so there are some who misunderstand and they say oh this man is saying that we have to eat his flesh so there are some who do misunderstand what Jesus says but then there are others who have caught what he is saying and they are not very happy with what he is saying this is their response to to his words yeah if we can have someone read out for us verses 41 and 42 which points out how they feel about what Jesus said 41 42 the Jews then complained about him because he said I am the bread I am the bread which came down from heaven and they said is not this Jesus the son of Joseph whose father and mother we know how is it then that he says I have come down from heaven yeah so we will reflect on this a little further after we come back from the break so if we can have everyone log in once again 10 minutes later thank you so much


Thanks so much. Good afternoon, everyone. And we're starting at one sharp, so if folks log on a little late, that's too bad. But we've got a lot to talk about. So my name's Brandon Butler. I am the Director of Public Policy Initiatives here at the Association of Research Libraries. And we have the pleasure of three really wonderful experts who are going to speak with us today a little about this Kurtzang v. Wiley case, which is pending in the Supreme Court. So first, let me tell you a little bit about the folks that are going to be joining us. Duke University's first Director of Copyright and Scholarly Communications. Kevin's principal role is to teach and advise faculty, administrators, and students about copyright, intellectual property licensing, and scholarly publishing. Kevin's a librarian and an attorney, double, double threat. He's admitted to the bar in Ohio and North Carolina and holds a graduate degree in religion from Yale University and my, my degree in philosophy. So we'll do a debate at a different webcast. At Duke, Kevin serves on the University's Intellectual Property Board and Digital Futures Task Force, and he convenes the Open Access Advisory Panel. He's currently the chair of the ACRL's Research and Scholarly Environment Committee and serves on the Spark Steering Committee. He's highly regarded by me and many weblog on Scholarly Communications, which you can find at Duke's Copyright and Publications in academia. And he is a frequent speaker on those topics. So Kevin's our first speaker. Our second speaker is Jonathan Bant. Jonathan helps shape the laws governing intellectual property and the Internet through a combination of legislative and appellate advocacy. Jonathan represents Client Act and other federal and state statutes relating to intellectual property and the Internet. He complements this legislative advocacy at the University Law Center and has written extensive hundred articles to Harvard for undergrad and Yale Law School for law, for his JD. He was a partner at Morrison and Forrester, affectionately known as MOFO here in DC. And now he is a solo practitioner who is, most importantly, of counsel to the Library Copyright Alliance. And the primary author has developed copyright education programs and related services to help ALA members understand decisions and workshops on copy, author of several articles. Harry was a librarian at the University of Arizona and related copyright issues. And she informed the campus community about pending copyright legislation and developed an advocate media arts from the University of Arizona. And as I mentioned is the author of two really. Now let me give you a little bit of an idea of what we're going to talk in general of the first sale right, whatever. Finally, you'll hear from Carrie and who would then turn around and sell them in the U.S. in violation of Wiley, but they were printed in Thailand and sold here in the U.S. And that is why we are here today. This very strange confluence of facts. And with that, I'm going to turn it over to Kevin to tell us why is all this stuff a problem. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Brandon. And I'm looking forward to that debate. I also have an undergraduate degree in philosophy. So we'll be, we'll be, well, I'm not so sure, well matched. But anyway, so what's the problem? I'm just going to take a few minutes to look at the legal structures. And in this case, it's the interrelation between different parts of the copyright law that have created the problem that the Supreme Court has to deal with in Kurtzog. The most basic thing to remember is that copyright is a bundle of exclusive rights. And one of those exclusive rights is the right to distribute the copyrighted work. That's the right that Mr. Kurtzog is accused of having infringed. And the language is very simple. The owner of the copyright has the exclusive right to do or to authorize the distribution of copies of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending. And of course, lending, which is part of the distribution right is the real issue for libraries. It's not for Mr. Kurtzog because he was accused of resale. But it's the real issue for libraries. As all librarians know, the all of the rights in the copyright act are subject to exceptions. And one of the most important is the limitation on the exclusive right to distribute. That's called first sale. The first sale right is or the first sale doctrine is an exception to that exclusive right to distribute the copyrighted work. And what the first sale doctrine says is that the owner of a particular copy of a work that is lawfully made under this title, and that language is very important, may sell, lend, or rent that copy without permission. And that's what libraries in the United States are founded on. And it also says that we made that we, the purchaser, the person who owns a lawfully made copy, may display the copy to persons present at the place where that copy is located. And by the way, that's extremely important for museums and raises an issue that if the Second Circuit's opinion in Kurtzog is upheld, there could be problems for museums as well as libraries, as well as lots and lots of other people. So this doctrine of first sale is what allows us to lend lawfully made copies of a work that we purchase for our libraries. It's what allows students to resell their textbooks after their classes are finished. It's what allows us to resell, lend, loan, all kinds of material, anything that is subject to copyright. Another way that we refer to this, to emphasize that it is an exception to the distribution right, is we often say that right of distribution and the right of public display, those exclusive rights are exhausted after the first sale of a particular copy. So sometimes this is referred to an international law, this is referred to as the doctrine of exhaustion. But all that means is that the distribution and public display rights, which exclusively belong to the copyright holder are exhausted. Once there's been a lawful sale of the work, that particular work is then subject to all the rights in the first sale doctrine. So now the question is, when does this exception, the first sale doctrine, actually apply? Specifically, the question is, what does it mean to say that a work is lawfully made under this title? This title refers to Title 17 of the United States Code, which is the copyright law of the United States. So what does that mean to say it's lawfully made under this title? There are several different answers and the courts have not been consistent in this. One possibility is that it means manufactured in the United States, actually made on US soil. Another possibility would be that it means manufactured abroad, but sold in the United States. There have been a number of different cases. There is a case called Quality King that involved mattresses in which the Supreme Court upheld the first sale, the doctrine of first sale, when the goods had been manufactured in the US, sold to a foreign distributor, and then re-imported the so-called round trip. In that case, the Supreme Court clearly said, hey, they were manufactured in the US. They were made right here. They're subject to Title 17 and therefore they're lawfully made under this title for the purpose of first sale. That was not a Supreme Court case, but a Ninth Circuit case called Drug Emporium, held that when foreign goods, goods manufactured outside of the United States are sold in the US with the authorization of the rights holder, they would still apply. Something can be manufactured outside the US but sold with the authorization of the rights holder in the US and still be subject to first sale. That's not the case in Caratsaw. Remember, Brandon just told you, the textbooks were manufactured outside of the United States and they were sold in the US without the authorization of the rights holder because Mr. Caratsaw believed they were subject to first sale and that he was allowed to do that. But that case gets us part way, and I think Brandon's, or I'm sorry, John is going to tell you more about that, but it doesn't get us to where we need to be. Instead, in Caratsaw, the Second Circuit, there's a Freudian slip, the Second Circuit focused entirely on the place of manufacture and said that if it was made outside the United States, there was no first sale. So this is what we're debating. When does the exception apply to what kinds of goods? Do they have to be manufactured in the United States? Can they make a round trip? Supreme Court has told us they could. What if the sales authorized in the US even though the goods were made elsewhere? What if the goods were made and sold elsewhere? Those are the different scenarios we're looking at. And in the Caratsaw case, the Second Circuit pretty clearly said they had to be made in the US to be subject to first sale. And part of the reason for that is this other clause in the Copyright Act, which is called the importation clause. It's a kind of a strange provision. It was put into our law before we had agreed to international treaties that extended copyright protection to works that were created by nationals of other countries in other countries. The importation clause is separate from first sale, but it is very much related. And basically it says that US copyright law applies only to works, well, no, I'm sorry, it used to say that US copyright law applies only to works that were manufactured in the United States. That was the first part of the importation clause and it was repealed when we joined the international treaties. But Section 602, the second part of the importation clause, still forbids importation without the authorization of the copyright holder of goods that are required outside the United States. That's the fundamental reason why the Second Circuit decided that first sale applied only to works manufactured in the United States. Because of this provision, they decided that works that were manufactured elsewhere were not lawfully made under this title and therefore not subject to the first sale exception. Now this provision that forbids importation of goods acquired outside the United States does have some exceptions.  You go like I did, went to study in London and brought back boxes full of books. That's okay. I'm not violating the importation clause by bringing back those single copies. There's also an exception that says that library books are okay up to five copies that are purchased abroad for the purpose of lending or archiving. So libraries have this limited exception to the importation clause for books that they buy abroad. That may not be enough and I think John is going to tell you about the risks there but it's there. Let's note that for now. There's also an exception for audio visual material that's bought for library purposes. It refers to only a single copy and interestingly it says for archiving purposes. We may import a single copy of an audio visual work for archiving purposes but unlike the exception for books it doesn't actually mention lending. So you see when we look at this clause you can see where the second circuit was coming from but you can also see why what they've said has the potential to cause significant problems. So basically the second circuit looked at this clause and said this tells us that only things that are manufactured in the United States are subject to the doctrine of first sale. Obviously the stakes for libraries are pretty high here and we're going to talk more about those in a minute. We acquire lots of materials that are manufactured abroad including lots of films. That's what I'm quoting, who am I quoting here? Donald Rumsfeld called the known unknowns. We know that we have lots of things that we bought abroad and right now we don't know whether or not the doctrine of first sale applies to that. So those items are the known unknowns. But we also know that U.S. publishers actually have a lot of their books printed overseas. So they're technically manufactured abroad but we may have no way to know that. So that's the unknown unknown for us. And the question is can we lend these items? Obviously a decision in this case has tremendous stakes for libraries the potential to wreak havoc in our libraries and not just in libraries. Potentially this case could cause problems for anyone who resells or buys secondhand material that contains copyrightable components. Obviously the case arose from a student reselling textbooks. If what Mr. Kirtzag did was illegal then what our students do routinely selling their secondhand textbooks may also be illegal. I also find myself wondering if I will be able to resell my Toyota which has copyrighted software in it. So the way this case comes out could affect a huge swath of so-called gray markets or secondhand markets. So it's a very, very important case to watch. And with that I'll turn over to John. Thank you very much Kevin. So just to quickly recap as Kevin and Brandon mentioned the Court of Appeals found that this phrase lawfully made under this title means manufactured in the United States. And so it said that the first sale doctrine did not apply to these copies that were lawfully printed abroad. The second circuit last year it was appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal and others granted. The oral argument is scheduled for later this month, October 29th and that's why we're holding this webcast now in anticipation of the oral argument. And then we expect a decision sometime before June 2013. That's when the current Supreme Court term ends. So we expect that the decision will be issued sometime before then. I mean it could come out in December or January, no later no later than June. So there's a lot of briefing admitted in this case. And so the main the lawfulness of selling this text as well. And we were talking about what our preferred outcome is that in other words that the term the phrase lawfully made under this title would apply to lawfully made anywhere. In other words lawfully made in compliance with the copyright law. So in other words non-paradical copies. So that would be the broadest interpretation of this phrase lawfully made under this title. That would be of, you know, greatest benefit to libraries. You know, we anticipated that that might not work. And so we were sort of coming up with various faults. So one fallback to Kevin mentioned, a theory that the Ninth Circuit first articulated lawfully made overseas but imported with the authorization of the rights holder. So that would take care of libraries with copies that they buy here in the United States. So that would be obviously helpful. And now it still wouldn't take us all the way where we want to go because we still need to have a variety of other theories. And I'll go over some of those in a minute. But a lot of lawfully made under this title. But in the alternative, you know, what are these other theories that they're as broad as and strong as they can be? And in particular, how do we, you know, how do we get adagy behind our amicably? And again, in our brief, a lot of it was, you know, besides legal argument, a lot of it was, you know, talking about the 400-year history of library lending in the United States and this parade of horribles that if we can't lend library, you know, if the first sale doctrine is limited, then there's this, then there are these possible ramifications. And so therefore, you need to give us some help either, either again, agree with Kurt Seng's argument or come up with some other theory that helps take care of libraries. And the appellee here, the respondent, the publisher, as well as the US government in various, various arguments they've made have, have, have in essence agreed that, so in particular, you know, why we said a library wouldn't have to worry about thought in the United States, even if it's foreign made, why they wouldn't have to worry about copies made in the United States first, they, they said, well, you know, there is this Ninth Circuit applied to, that's the first sale doctrine applies to selling it to a library, there's that the library can, can lend it. In other words, why would someone sell something to a library if they didn't expect the library to lend it? The Solicitor General of the United States in its brief that again affirmed the very little bit more in a minute, in agreed that all these different be interpreted in a broad manner helpful to libraries, but they also had a very interesting theory as to why the, the applies to copies made in the United, made overseas but sold with authorization in the United States. It said that it's not a matter of how you interpret sexual 109A, which is the first sale doctrine as Cota talking about before, and you don't need to worry about this, you never had, even if Congress never enacted section 109A, there is an exhaustion doctrine, there is a first sale sold with the authorization of the right, expires, the distribution right expires, exhaust, with respect to that copy on the copyright, on the distribution right. So that's, that's a pretty far-reaching theory that the Solicitor General articulated as a sort of common law of the doctrine, and you know, I just to leap ahead a bit to the prediction phase, I have a feeling that that's something we'll be hearing more about. So in any event, where does all, you do end up with something, if it's made in the United States, you obviously, you know, the first sale doctrine applies, so then that's the top line, so then you get to the next category manufactured outside the United States, and then the top, there, you know, and it splits, and then the top line, again, is authorized, you know, it's the authorized U.S. sale of the copy, and if the authorized, if it's sale with, with authorization, then one theory would be again this Ninth Circuit theory, or another one would be, and then, but what happens if it's not sold with authorization in the United States? In other words, you still buy it overseas, and this again is an area where we had some concerns, so Kevin mentioned you have these five, there is this exception for a library to import five copies for the purpose of lending, of archiving and library lending, but the problem with that, if it buys five copies of a book, then it can do whatever it wants with them. Well, not so fast, but even if it is buying, you still have a problem, because the way that for the purpose of library lending, but it doesn't actually say you can lend it. Now, you can say, well, that of course is implied, but it still doesn't say that you can lend it, and so that was one of the things where it would be ridiculous if it did not, if it was not implicit, was the library not only to import, as ever, any future litigation, bother going there, because they know that we'll be able to buy us not only to import, and then finally, you know, we do have this even, even assuming that the copy and lend five copies of books, we still have the other prong that Kevin mentioned, only allowed to import the one copy, but it's only for preservation purposes, so if you were importing a DVD of a foreign film, but then you wanted to lend it, you know, even allows you to lend it, so at that point you'd need to rely on fair use, on implied license, but certainly that is again an argument that, not again, not only implied license, but also fair use, and that's an essence saying that in its opinion, if a library engages in lending, that is a fair use, and so that having simply, you know, even that one sentence in this footnote, in the Solicitor General, again very helpful in the brief, you know, the Solicitor General, and then again hopefully from the court, that the very, if for some rebound, not to apply to these copies made, and with that I will turn things over to Carrie. About why libraries care about this issue, and of course it goes back to your professional values as a librarian copyright law, and we know the copyright law is its purposes to advance learning through the distribution, creative works, information, not very important, in getting items out, distributing them. Easy it is to borrow a book from a friend, or how easy it is to get a book from the library, check it out, maybe you want to buy it. The other reason why we care is that only libraries offer no FIACs, and there still are many people, if we don't offer this type of, we are democracy, we believe that people should be informed citizens so they can participate, and really we buy in the marketplace, that you might be promote literacy, creativity, you remain anonymous, or that they can track, limit our ability to acquire and lend many many many things. When we know that just here in the United States are manufactured overseas, you can see that this would really put a damper on what we could acquire and lend. The worst case scenario is that libraries would have to ensure that books they lend are manufactured in the United States, and that would be difficult to do because these books that we have today aren't necessarily including where they are printed. So how would you know if you had a title that was produced in a foreign state? Another thing that I've always kind of been afraid of is that court will get into the kinds of lending that other countries do, where exhaustion applies, but they have to pay a lending fee in order to lend books. And I can see that publishers would be quite happy to see libraries paying a license fee to lend books. Now it would usually be like some part of your acquisition, and then the other thing is that it could spark interest in digital first sale. That could lead to some undesirable information policy, where again the rights holders might win big and we would find ourselves strapped for getting content, pushing the content more into the marketplace rather than at the free. Saying anything about what I think the likelihood of it is, I think Jonathan has already told us what the best case scenario would be, and that would be for the court to define lawfully made under this title as applying to anything that was lawfully made with the authority of the rights holder, regardless of where it was made or where it was sold, as long as it's not pirated, as long as it's not a DVD that's been pressed and somebody's are burned in somebody's basement to be sold on a blanket. It should be subject to first sale because it would have been lawfully made under this title, lawfully simply meaning made with the authority of the rights holder. And I think there's an argument for that. I hinted at that a little bit, but I want to say it explicitly. The importation clause that's being used here to define lawfully made under this title was part of our copyright law before we recognized most copyrights in foreign works, long before we joined the Byrne Convention in 1988, which is when we did begin to recognize all kinds of international copyright. So the importation clause is really a hangover from a time when copyright law was used as a kind of protectionist tool. And I think we need to recognize, I think the court needs to recognize that now we are in a situation where we extend the rights under copyright very, very broadly. Any signatory nation of the Byrne Convention gets national treatment in the United States. In other words, they're subject to exactly the same rights that American authors are. And I would like to see the court recognize that in this changed situation, it is not only the case that we should extend the copyrights, the rights under copyright to limit the exclusive rights to international works, but also make those works subject to the same exceptions. If the court follows the Second Circuit, then basically works that are manufactured abroad would be in a better stance than works that are made in the United States. And that would be a very bizarre outcome. So I would hope the court would look to our international agreements and say those international agreements really push us towards ruling that lawfully made under this title applies to any work that can claim U.S. copyright protection, that is any work that was manufactured with the authority of the rights holder. So that's the best case scenario and that's one of the ways I think the court could get to it. It's funny that is that that would be a really deep irony because as you described right the U.S. Copyright Act, initially U.S. and it sounds like Lang would reverse that entirely. That is it's ill and lending and all that good stuff. So it would be a really perverse outcome. And that's a really good point to note that the Second Circuit in rendering their decision actually noted that that was happening. They knew there was a bad outcome here and they still felt bound to do this and hopefully the Supreme Court can reverse that. That's right. Okay and then Jonathan I wonder if you since you've been reading all of these briefs. I thought that there was a the likelihood of a ferment of the Second Circuit was very high that they would simply sort of come out with a very simple ferment saying lawfully made under this title means lawfully made under the in the United States. And yes it has all those perverse outcomes that Kevin was alluding to but that's Congress's problem and you know this has been the rule for you know empty umbeers and we haven't seen you know a lot of companies moving overseas just for all kinds of reasons and so you know and we haven't seen publishers really clamping down on the secondary market. So you know the concerns that people are raising are sort of exempt. A month ago that's where I thought the Wiley brief where they in essence agreed to this Ninth Circuit to copies made over favor of that position in our brief and they you know they the justification prize that they did that but then all the more so in the lawfully made overseas but sold with authorization in the United States you know that a different 109a but but relying on the common doctrine but the fact I think that that it's very likely that the Supreme Court either in its hold doesn't involve copies that are lawfully sold with the authorization of the right. I think it's highly likely that that the decision if not in the holding that they will indicate that that that what Jonathan thinks is the decision comes out where related communities that we work with and for what are the next have librarians really if the ruling goes bad I would anticipate that grassroots continue to have your garage sales you can can think that was my breath and I actually wanted to ask Jonathan a question if you don't mind Jonathan you outlined a set of exceptions and the solicitor general has outlined that set of exceptions apparently that would pretty much cover the ground for library lending but I want to get to what Kerry just said none of those exceptions it seems to me would authorize our students for those of us who are in universities to resell their textbooks would they and it seems to me that this would still basically allow publishers to close down the secondary textbook market which I think has always been desirable from their point of view and would it wouldn't it still give me a problem with reselling my Toyota would not it be possible for Toyota to say to me when you resell that Toyota you have to give us 10% of the sale or whatever it is or we won't let you do that well I think again a lot depends on what the court authorization in the United States then that probably would take care of the group that's new in the United States and and and you know if you know let's say let's say early possible where where they simply say no it's got to be lawfully captured in the United States or in copies whatsoever in that situation I would say at least with you know but but actually in the Costco about at the outset when the case went back on remand to the district was misusing its copyright because it basically said look this is not a copy to the watch is not a copyrighted product logo on the watch is to make that argument with respect to misuse for them to control the watch was to the operation of the watch and it would probably be less of a problem for you doing I think there are theories out there but it would make it would be a lot harder you know your garage sailor are we really confident that the court yeah and I agree all of the briefs as Jonathan has said Jonathan's own brief was wonderful and the brief from Wiley and from the Solicitor General have put this issue pretty squarely in front of the court I think it would be kind of embarrassing to the court to try and duck it now all of you on that and then Kevin I wanted to ask you kind of a theory of why this whole problem exists which is that we but there are these we know law kind of gets a short shrift in the supreme court at least with some of the justices out there do you think that the justices would be sympathy in our international agreement I think there probably is I think that international IP protection has it certainly has in the last few administrations then other kinds of international law and even the administrations that have looked with a scant looked a scant at international law have been very encouraging of international agreements of ratcheting up IP protection patent and copyright protection internationally so I think this is an area where the court is more likely to look at the policies behind our agreement our acceptance of the burn agreement and the the TRIPS agreement which is part of the World Trade Organization's general agreement on tax and tariff and I guess that gets at the reason I think the court would look more favorably on these international agreements because they're trade agreements we're not looking at other countries and saying well they don't have a death penalty so therefore the United States should have not have a death penalty that argument has never had any weight with U.S. courts or very little weight with U.S. courts but I think looking at these and recognizing that they are trade agreements and this is a trade issue makes the more likely to give some account to the international agreement but that's just the theory this is Jonathan Bannon back and I'm sorry that I that I he got disconnected myself so I missed the opportunity to answer that earlier question but if I may this goes back to you know how likely is it that library issues would be addressed at all given that this case doesn't involve libraries and and again until if you I would have agreed with that again you know as you say the facts really didn't address libraries the facts of the case didn't address libraries and we were sort of just trying to inject ourselves in hopes of someone maybe one of libraries and saying something nice about libraries and you know and saying a nice about the theories that we were articulating this sort of middle of the road compromised position I think that that again significantly increases or at least you know again maybe in a footnote maybe maybe in a concurring opinion maybe in dicta but I you know the fact that the the respondent and then the solicitor general you know maybe just again reflects the notion that you know maybe you know people out there really really do love us and and and they realize that these arguments that we were raising about the potential adverse impact were to the court and so that they needed to find a way out for libraries you did include them in the library sale you'd you'd have some trouble also earlier Kevin mentioned museums I mean you I know I remember at the library we used to get a lot of images you know you know a lot of pictures photographs can we put them on the wall or not that would be the question the museum association to file the brief haven't they yes the museum association and and about as again that phrase lawfully made into this section 109c section 1101 that's the means the flawfully made into this title means lawfully made in the United States so that means that would not allow this room now again you would have to come 10-1 all of a sudden would not appear would not apply these foreign-made films basically like everything IRL does is joining us and I hope you'll stay tuned as we follow this exciting saga that I think is probably going to be with us for a few more months no matter