For its part, Wiley argues that there is a good reason for textbooks to be sold at lower prices in certain foreign markets. The reality, they say, is that students in poorer countries simply cannot afford American textbook prices, which would deny these students access to books. To the argument that this amounts to “price gouging” American consumers, they explain that there are costs beyond printing and distribution, namely, the costs of writing these textbooks. This needs to be recouped by the publishers, but can't be if foreign copies which do not cover these costs are allowed to be imported into the United States.
The lower courts have generally favored Wiley's view in these cases, though decisions have been split, and experts don't have any strong sense as to how the Supreme Court will rule. Personally, I am troubled by this case for reasons beyond the difficulty for booksellers and libraries in knowing what books can and cannot be sold or loaned. This could be a means of keeping information away from Americans that is accessible to others. Freedom of information, in my opinion, is a critical right. Many other freedoms are effectively lost if you are not free to obtain information (how can one intelligently vote without access to relevant information?). Indeed, foreign editions of textbooks might provide more information, as American editions frequently have to be approved for use in schools in their jurisdiction by politically appointed reviewers (censors?) who may have agendas other than objective truth.
All of this, however, may be rendered moot by quickly changing electronic reality. The use of printed textbooks is rapidly declining at U.S. colleges, somewhat more affordable electronic versions taking their place. The same is true for all kinds of books. Information distribution no longer depends on printed books, especially from foreign lands, where the internet allows for instantaneous communication of data from all over the world. As important as these issues are “on paper,” technology may be relegating them to a debate about how safety rules apply to horse-drawn carriages.
