Under the environment of electronic commerce, intangible objects made of digitalized material are expected to have free transmission. If such objects are protected under copyright law, the copyright owner doesn't only face the threat of unauthorized reproduction, but also the risk of illegal transmission. As a matter of fact, there is substantive difference between the transmission of digitized copies and the distribution of tangible copies in terms of evaluation under copyright law. Even though a single digitized copy was delivered to a single user, the transmission of multicopies possibly spread over the internet due to authorized reproduction, and has negative impacts upon the copyright owner’s normal exploitation of the digitized work in the market. It is undeniable that the transmission of digitized copies, like traditional tangible ones, is highly connected with public interest deriving from free trade of goods. In view of the interest balance established upon both copyright protection and free transmission of copyrightable copies, it is concerned if the traditional exhaustion doctrine may be applied under the digitized transactions? Or should the traditional exhaustion doctrine be adjusted to accommodate the environment of electronic commerce where the unauthorized reproduction is rampant? Is it also an alternative under copyright law to implement the copyright licensing clauses in place of the exhaustion doctrine? This article attempts to base upon the jurisprudence of consideration balance to review the application of the exhaustion doctrine in the era of digitized transaction.