body: Though similar questions have been asked before, I could not find one that answers this exact premise.
  
  
  Say, there is a 3D printable file distributed under e.g. the CC BY-NC 4.0 license. This license has a non-commercial clause.
  
  
  Another question ([Does a 3D print of a CAD file constitute a derivative work?](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/7336/does-a-3d-print-of-a-cad-file-constitute-a-derivative-work)) already confirms that prints of 3D models are a derivative work of the file and thus still fall under the original license.
  
  
  This would mean, one could not sell a print of a thus protected file.
  
  
  But how does that relate to the First Sale Doctrine? (<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine>)
  
  
  The First Sale Doctrine says, that the copyright owner's exclusive right to distribute a particular copy ends once they make it's first sale. So e.g. a copyright owner cannot stop a buyer of a book of theirs from reselling this particular copy of the book, while still retaining the right to stop the buyer from copying the book.
  
  
  Now, one could argue that distributing the file and allowing others to make physical copies from that file would be similar to a first sale and thus allow the owner of the physical copy of the object to resell it.
  
  
  If that's not the case, what else can the copyright owner restrict the license taker restrict from doing? Would it be possible to restrict the license taker to only print the file e.g. using a specific brand of filament? Can the copyright owner dictate terms of use for 3D printed objects derived from their file?
  
  
  
title: How far does the derivative work copyright go for 3D printed objects?