Supreme Court Rules 7-2 for Writers Union in NYT v Tasini

Subject: Supreme Court Rules 7-2 for Writers Union in NYT v Tasini
NINCH-ANNOUNCE (david@ninch.org)
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 17:52:32 -0400

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Message-Id: <a05100313b75d616dd251@[192.100.21.22]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 17:52:32 -0400
To: ninch-announce@cni.org
From: NINCH-ANNOUNCE <david@ninch.org>
Subject: Supreme Court Rules 7-2 for Writers Union in NYT v Tasini

NINCH ANNOUNCEMENT
News on Networking Cultural Heritage Resources
from across the Community

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Writers Union
http://www.nwu.org/tvt/vichome.htm

High Court Sides With Freelance Writers in Electronic Rights Case
New York Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scotus-Free-Lance.html?ex=994485244&ei=1&en=56d5cb000908ea72

>From: "Jonathan Tasini" <jt@pipeline.com>
>To: "Jonathan Tasini" <jt@pipeline.com>
>Subject: Supreme Court Victory Statement
>Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:16:48 -0400
>Organization: National Writers Union

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Jonathan Tasini
                                                               (212)-254-0279
                                                               Lindsay Barenz
                                                              (202)-842-3100

National Writers Union and UAW hail Supreme Court ruling as victory for
creators and consumers

Leaders of the National Writers Union and the International Union, UAW
described today's Supreme Court ruling-which upholds copyright protections
for free-lance writers-as a victory for creators and consumers. Union
leaders also offered to begin negotiations immediately with the publishing
industry to resolve billions of dollars in potential liabilities created by
repeat violations of U.S. copyright law.

"The Court has upheld the spirit of the Constitutional protection for
copyright, which was written for the benefit of individual authors," said
Jonathan Tasini, president of the National Writers Union (UAW Local 1981)
and the lead plaintiff in Tasini vs. New York Times. "Now, it's time for
the media industry to pay creators their fair share and let's sit down
and negotiate over this today."

By a 7-2 majority, the Court upheld a September 1999 unanimous ruling by the
U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, which found that The New York Times and
publishers had committed copyright infringement when they resold freelance
newspaper and magazine articles, via electronic databases such as
LexisNexis, without asking permission or making additional payments to the
original authors.

"We're proud to have supported our members in the National Writers Union in
their fight to be treated fairly by the publishing industry," said UAW
President Stephen P. Yokich. "Today's decision paves the way for writers
and other creators to be fairly compensated for their work. That's good
news all of us, because we all benefit when the legal protections of
copyright encourage the creation of new art, science, and literature."

The International Union, UAW, has provided legal and financial support for
the groundbreaking litigation, which was filed by nine free-lance members of
UAW Local 1981, the National Writers Union, in 1993

"Our message to the publishing industry now is: let's negotiate," said UAW
Vice President Elizabeth Bunn, who directs the union's Technical, Office and
Professional Department. "The New York Times and other publishers face
billions of dollars of potential liability for selling articles to which
they hold no copyright. The way to settle these obligations is to meet at
the bargaining table, so we can find solutions that are fair to writers, to
the industry, and for consumers."

The NWU, Tasini said, is already party to a class action lawsuit, which will
enforce the copyright protections affirmed today by the Supreme Court.

"We want to settle past claims in a reasonable fashion, and establish a
mechanism so that free-lancers can be compensated fairly from now on," said
Tasini. The Publication Rights Clearinghouse (PRC), said Tasini,
established by the NWU in 1993, offers a way for writers and publisher to
track the ownership of copyright, and payment for authorized re-sale of
copyrighted works. Free-lance writers, whether or not they are NWU
members, can use the PRC to license their works by visiting www.nwu.org.

Further details regarding the Tasini vs. New York Times litigation can be
found at: www.nwu.org/tvt/vichome.htm

The National Writers Union has 7,000 members nationwide, including
journalists, book authors, technical writers and poets. It is the only union
dedicated solely to advancing the interests of freelance writers.

The International Union, UAW has more than 1.3 million active and retired
members, including more than 100,00 members in its Technical, Office and
Professional Department. In addition to free-lance writers, the UAW also
represents attorneys, clerical workers, educators, firefighters, graphic
designers, health care workers, librarians, museum workers, public
employees, and many others.

============================================================================

>Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 12:11:24 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Ann Okerson <ann.okerson@yale.edu>
>To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
>cc: Scott Bennett <Scott.Bennett@yale.edu>,
>Subject: NYTimes.com Article: High Court Sides With Freelance Writers in
> Electronic Rights Case
>Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
>
>Major news for all of us. Ann Okerson

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Supremes decide Tasini in favor of writers
High Court Sides With Freelance Writers in Electronic Rights Case

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 10:57 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Ruling against big media companies in an information
age dispute Monday, the Supreme Court said free-lance writers may control
whether articles they sold for print in a regular newspaper or magazine
may be reproduced in electronic form.

The court ruled 7-2 that compilation in an electronic database is
different from other kinds of archival or library storage of material that
once appeared in print. That means that copyright laws require big media
companies such as The New York Times to get free-lancers' permission
before posting their work online.

Justices Stephen Breyer and John Paul Stevens dissented.

At issue was how to treat copyright works when technological advances
changed the way information would be available in ways neither the writer
nor the publication foresaw.

Although seemingly esoteric, the copyright fight goes to the heart of the
Internet's basic appeal to researchers and casual users -- how much
information is available at the click of a computer mouse.

Large publishers argued that if they lost, they would probably remove a
lot of material from electronic view rather than fight with writers over
permission and fees.

The case turned on whether electronic reproduction of a newspaper or
periodical constitutes a revision of the original print edition. Under
copyright law, publishers do not need authors' permission to produce a
revised version of the original edition.

The case largely affects articles, photographs and illustrations produced
a decade or so ago -- before free-lance contracts provided for the
material's electronic use.

Six free-lance writers sued The New York Times, Newsday, Time Inc. and
other publishers over inclusion of their work in electronic databases.
Some databases require the user to pay a fee, such as LEXIS/NEXIS, while
others are available free over the Internet.

A federal judge first ruled for the publishers, throwing out the writers'
suit on grounds that electronic databases are revisions under the
copyright law.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York reversed in 1999,
finding that copyright law required publishers to seek authors'
permission.

The case is New York Times v. Tasini, 00-201.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scotus-Free-Lance.html?ex=994485244&ei=1&en=56d5cb000908ea72

/-----------------------------------------------------------------\

Visit NYTimes.com for complete access to the most authoritative news
coverage on the Web, updated throughout the day.

Become a member today! It's free!

http://www.nytimes.com?eta

\-----------------------------------------------------------------/

For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com.

-- 
==============================================================
NINCH-Announce is an announcement listserv, produced by the National 
Initiative for a Networked Cultural Heritage (NINCH). The subjects of 
announcements are not the projects of NINCH, unless otherwise noted; 
neither does NINCH necessarily endorse the subjects of announcements. 
We attempt to credit all re-distributed news and announcements and 
appreciate reciprocal credit.
For questions, comments or requests to un-subscribe, contact the editor:
<mailto:david@ninch.org>
==============================================================
See and search back issues of NINCH-ANNOUNCE at 
<http://www.cni.org/Hforums/ninch-announce/>.
==============================================================

Supreme Court Rules 7-2 for Writers Union in NYT v Tas

NINCH ANNOUNCEMENT

News on Networking Cultural Heritage Resources

from across the Community

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Writers Union

http://www.nwu.org/tvt/vichome.htm

High Court Sides With Freelance Writers in Electronic Rights Case

New York Times article:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scotus-Free-Lance.html?ex=994485244&ei=1&en=56d5cb000908ea72

From: "Jonathan Tasini" <jt@pipeline.com>

To: "Jonathan Tasini" <jt@pipeline.com>

Subject: Supreme Court Victory Statement

Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:16:48 -0400

Organization: National Writers Union

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Jonathan Tasini
                                                              (212)-254-0279
                                                              Lindsay Barenz
                                                             (202)-842-3100

National Writers Union and UAW hail Supreme Court ruling as victory for
creators and consumers

Leaders of the National Writers Union and the International Union, UAW
described today's Supreme Court ruling-which upholds copyright protections
for free-lance writers-as a victory for creators and consumers.   Union
leaders also offered to begin negotiations immediately with the publishing
industry to resolve billions of dollars in potential liabilities created by
repeat violations of U.S. copyright law.

"The Court has upheld the spirit of the Constitutional protection for
copyright, which was written for the benefit of individual authors," said
Jonathan Tasini, president of the National Writers Union (UAW Local 1981)
and the lead plaintiff in Tasini vs. New York Times. "Now, it's time for
the media industry to pay creators their fair share and let's sit down
and negotiate over this today."

By a 7-2 majority, the Court upheld a September 1999 unanimous ruling by the
U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, which found that The New York Times and
publishers had committed copyright infringement when they resold freelance
newspaper and magazine articles, via electronic databases such as
LexisNexis, without asking permission or making additional payments to the
original authors.

"We're proud to have supported our members in the National Writers Union in
their fight to be treated fairly by the publishing industry," said UAW
President Stephen P. Yokich. "Today's decision paves the way for writers
and other creators to be fairly compensated for their work. That's good
news all of us, because we all benefit when the legal protections of
copyright encourage the creation of new art, science, and literature."

The International Union, UAW, has provided legal and financial support for
the groundbreaking litigation, which was filed by nine free-lance members of
UAW Local 1981, the National Writers Union, in 1993

"Our message to the publishing industry now is: let's negotiate," said UAW
Vice President Elizabeth Bunn, who directs the union's Technical, Office and
Professional Department. "The New York Times and other publishers face
billions of dollars of potential liability for selling articles to which
they hold no copyright.    The way to settle these obligations is to meet at
the bargaining table, so we can find solutions that are fair to writers, to
the industry, and for consumers."

The NWU, Tasini said, is already party to a class action lawsuit, which will
enforce the copyright protections affirmed today by the Supreme Court.

"We want to settle past claims in a reasonable fashion, and establish a
mechanism so that free-lancers can be compensated fairly from now on," said
Tasini.   The Publication Rights Clearinghouse (PRC), said Tasini,
established by the NWU in 1993, offers a way for writers and publisher to
track the ownership of copyright, and payment for authorized re-sale of
copyrighted works.   Free-lance writers, whether or not they are NWU
members, can use the PRC to license their works by visiting www.nwu.org.

Further details regarding the Tasini vs. New York Times litigation can be

found at: www.nwu.org/tvt/vichome.htm

The National Writers Union has 7,000 members nationwide, including
journalists, book authors, technical writers and poets. It is the only union
dedicated solely to advancing the interests of freelance writers.

The International Union, UAW has more than 1.3 million active and retired
members, including more than 100,00 members in its Technical, Office and
Professional Department. In addition to free-lance writers, the UAW also
represents attorneys, clerical workers, educators, firefighters, graphic
designers, health care workers, librarians, museum workers, public
employees, and many others.

============================================================================

Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 12:11:24 -0400 (EDT)

From: Ann Okerson <ann.okerson@yale.edu>

To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu

cc: Scott Bennett <Scott.Bennett@yale.edu>,

Subject: NYTimes.com Article: High Court Sides With Freelance Writers in

Electronic Rights Case

Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu

Major news for all of us. Ann Okerson

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Supremes decide Tasini in favor of writers
High Court Sides With Freelance Writers in Electronic Rights Case

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 10:57 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Ruling against big media companies in an information
age dispute Monday, the Supreme Court said free-lance writers may control
whether articles they sold for print in a regular newspaper or magazine
may be reproduced in electronic form.

The court ruled 7-2 that compilation in an electronic database is
different from other kinds of archival or library storage of material that
once appeared in print. That means that copyright laws require big media
companies such as The New York Times to get free-lancers' permission
before posting their work online.

Justices Stephen Breyer and John Paul Stevens dissented.

At issue was how to treat copyright works when technological advances

changed the way information would be available in ways neither the writer
nor the publication foresaw.

Although seemingly esoteric, the copyright fight goes to the heart of the
Internet's basic appeal to researchers and casual users -- how much
information is available at the click of a computer mouse.

Large publishers argued that if they lost, they would probably remove a
lot of material from electronic view rather than fight with writers over
permission and fees.

The case turned on whether electronic reproduction of a newspaper or
periodical constitutes a revision of the original print edition. Under
copyright law, publishers do not need authors' permission to produce a
revised version of the original edition.

The case largely affects articles, photographs and illustrations produced
a decade or so ago -- before free-lance contracts provided for the
material's electronic use.

Six free-lance writers sued The New York Times, Newsday, Time Inc. and
other publishers over inclusion of their work in electronic databases.
Some databases require the user to pay a fee, such as LEXIS/NEXIS, while
others are available free over the Internet.

A federal judge first ruled for the publishers, throwing out the writers'
suit on grounds that electronic databases are revisions under the
copyright law.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York reversed in 1999,

finding that copyright law required publishers to seek authors'

permission.

The case is New York Times v. Tasini, 00-201.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scotus-Free-Lance.html?ex=994485244&ei=1&en=56d5cb000908ea72

/-----------------------------------------------------------------\

Visit NYTimes.com for complete access to the most authoritative news
coverage on the Web, updated throughout the day.

Become a member today! It's free!

http://www.nytimes.com?eta

\-----------------------------------------------------------------/

For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com.

--

==============================================================

NINCH-Announce is an announcement listserv, produced by the National Initiative for a Networked Cultural Heritage (NINCH). The subjects of announcements are not the projects of NINCH, unless otherwise noted; neither does NINCH necessarily endorse the subjects of announcements. We attempt to credit all re-distributed news and announcements and appreciate reciprocal credit.

For questions, comments or requests to un-subscribe, contact the editor:
<mailto:david@ninch.org>
==============================================================
See and search back issues of NINCH-ANNOUNCE at <http://www.cni.org/Hforums/ninch-announce/>.
==============================================================

This archive was generated by hypermail 2a16 : Fri Dec 21 2001 - 11:30:24 EST