[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
[Fwd: FW: Supreme Court Rules on Tasini vs. New York Times]
- To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
- Subject: [Fwd: FW: Supreme Court Rules on Tasini vs. New York Times]
- From: Howard Flack <[email protected]>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:02:59 +0100 (BST)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_hVdxIVRzlDt6YwSwHcLHqQ) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit -- Howard Flack http://www.unige.ch/crystal/ahdf/Howard.Flack.html Laboratoire de Cristallographie Phone: +41 22 702 62 49 24 quai Ernest-Ansermet mailto:[email protected] CH-1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland Fax: +41 22 702 61 08 --Boundary_(ID_hVdxIVRzlDt6YwSwHcLHqQ) Content-type: message/rfc822 Return-path: <[email protected]> Received: from gate.unige.ch ([129.194.8.77]) by mbx.unige.ch (PMDF V6.0-24 #38753) with ESMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected] (ORCPT [email protected]); Tue, 26 Jun 2001 18:13:48 +0200 (MEST) Received: from DIRECTORY-DAEMON.gate.unige.ch by gate.unige.ch (PMDF V6.0-24 #38753) id <[email protected]> for [email protected] (ORCPT [email protected]); Tue, 26 Jun 2001 18:13:47 +0200 (MEST) Received: from mails.dtic.mil (mails.dtic.mil [131.84.1.19]) by gate.unige.ch (PMDF V6.0-24 #38753) with ESMTP id <[email protected]> for [email protected]; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 18:13:47 +0200 (MEST) Received: from list.dtic.mil (list.dtic.mil [131.84.105.11]) by mails.dtic.mil (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/990419cac) with ESMTP id MAA18886; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 12:13:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from list (list.dtic.mil [172.16.105.11]) by list.dtic.mil (8.9.3+Sun/1.0) with ESMTP id MAA18795; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 12:12:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DTIC.MIL by DTIC.MIL (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 27185 for [email protected]; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 12:12:31 -0400 Received: from mails.dtic.mil (mails.dtic.mil [131.84.1.19]) by list.dtic.mil (8.9.3+Sun/1.0) with ESMTP id KAA24644 for <[email protected]>; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:21:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sys723.dtic.mil (sys723e.dtic.mil [131.84.1.2]) by mails.dtic.mil (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/990419cac) with ESMTP id KAA21092 for <[email protected]>; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:21:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sys723.dtic.mil (root@localhost) by sys723.dtic.mil with ESMTP id f5QEJiN02158 for <[email protected]>; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:19:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dticexch.dtic.mil (dticexch.dtic.mil [131.84.6.66]) by sys723.dtic.mil with ESMTP id f5QEJiJ02154 for <[email protected]>; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:19:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by dticexch.dtic.mil with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <NT3G2YD4>; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:21:44 -0400 Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:21:43 -0400 From: "Molholm, Kurt" <[email protected]> Subject: FW: Supreme Court Rules on Tasini vs. New York Times Sender: ICSTI-L list <[email protected]> Approved-by: [email protected] To: [email protected] Reply-to: ICSTI-L list <[email protected]> Message-id: <[email protected]> X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Comments: cc: Directors <[email protected]> FYI, Kurt -----Original Message----- From: Gail Hodge [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 3:35 PM To: [email protected] Subject: FYI:Supreme Court Rules on Tasini vs. New York Times In a ruling that is likely to have a major impact on authors, publishers, and secondary database producers, the Supreme Court has ruled on the case of Tasini vs. New York Times. http://www.cnn.com/2001/LAW/06/25/scotus.copyright.ap/index.html >From the CNN article: "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." The decision itself is likely to be available online soon. While the article signals out big media companies and free lancers, this is expected to have an impact on author/publisher relations in general. It should be noted that many publishers have already gone to so called "Martian" permissions where they ask for copyright transfer everywhere, anytime, and in any media. It isn't clear what the impact might be on permissions done under the old regime before permission and copyright transfer agreements included electronic versions. Some anticipate that rather than try to get permissions from authors of old material, publishers may just remove that material from electronic databases. Gail --Boundary_(ID_hVdxIVRzlDt6YwSwHcLHqQ)--
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Prev by Date: Re: Problems with IUCr listserv? Re: Subscription approval request
- Next by Date: Re: Publication policy/archiving policy
- Prev by thread: Re: Publication policy/archiving policy
- Next by thread: [Fwd: FW: Supreme Court Rules on Tasini vs. New York Times]
- Index(es):