Rich Moneybags owns Excitement Media Co., and he purchases a copy of Sally's book following her infamous fire-setting phase. He decides to make a movie of the scandalous love triangle between Sirius, Sally and DoLittle. Excitement Media releases a movie titled Sally Sirius: Hearts on Fire without permission from Sally or Salacious Publications, Inc. The movie is a fictionalization of this love triangle, and the actress playing Sally copies her exact wardrobe, dress, accent, and other identifying characteristics.

1. Can Rich Moneybags rely on the First Sale doctrine as a defense to copyright infringement?
2. Does your answer change if the movie created by Excitement Media Co., Sally Sirius: Hearts on Fire, only use facts from Sally's book? If so, what case law decision supports your conclusion?
3. BONUS: Can Sally argue that she is a distinct copyrighted character, with certain dress, accent, and life story, and the unauthorized movie about her is an infringing usurpation of her character?
4. BONUS: A pirate website uploads an infringing copy of Sally Sirius: Hearts on Fireand streams this movie to users. Which of the 106 rights are implicated by the unauthorized streaming of this movie? Which 106 rights are implicated if users were also able to download the movie? What can Excitement Media Co. do if the pirate website uploads a clip of Sally Sirius: Hearts on Fire to YouTube?