It's Official: LAT/WP vs Free Republic Settles

LAT/WP vs Free Republic ^ | June 19, 2002 | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

I just received official word that our settlement with the LAT/WP in their alleged copyright infringement and unfair competion suit against Free Republic (click Source link above for complete history of the case) is completely finalized with the court. I do not have a copy of the final order yet, but the basic terms are as follows:

• Unless we receive prior written permission on an article by article basis, Free Republic agrees to continue posting only excerpts (as allowed by fair use) and links from any of the LAT/WP or related publications.

• Free Republic agrees to remove all full text copies of any LAT/WP and related publications copyrighted articles from its archives and servers and to destroy all copies of same.

• Neither party is awarded any damages, attorney fees or costs except that Free Republic agrees to pay the Los Angeles Times $5,000 and the Washington Post $5,000 (these negotiated amounts have already been paid).

I will post the entire final order including the list of related publications as soon as I receive a copy and get it scanned in.

Well, my fingers are not cold and dead and my keyboard has not been ripped away. While this is not entirely a win for FR, neither is it a crushing defeat. Free Republic is alive and well and the fight against liberalism continues on. It's a crying shame that the hallowed words of the WP/LAT will no longer grace our pages, but, somehow, I am sure we will manage to live on without them.

And despite what our detractors may say, we have not committed any crimes or broken any laws and we have not admitted to any guilt. We have negotiated a mutual agreement and settlement with the LAT/WP and have agreed upon satisfactory terms for continuing forward without having to spend the rest of our lives in court.

Many thanks to all of you for your past and continuing support.

Regards.

Jim Robinson

[nicollo]

You leave them to their own, you leave them on their own. Then you have no say.

That's the beauty of what JimRob created here, an instant reply, no filters, no editorial ass to kiss, and no advertisers to carress. Just the news, ma'am. And here's what it means.

[Salvation]

Thank you for hanging in there and fighting the good fight for us.
God bless.

[Grampa Dave]

Yep, Tom, these pathetic POS's will be sucking up the Prozac and other CNS anti depressants 24/7 based two recent events.

Now they have nothing to live for.

We just finished another success Freepathon, and this legal issue has been laid to rest. That is a one two punch in one week for these losers in life!

We can forget them as Free Republic moves on to bigger and better things.

[CedarDave]

From a quick reading, I do not see how the Kinko case is all that relevant to that of FR. They were taking college texts or assigned reading, photocopying it, and selling it to students, presumably for classroom discussion. The difference that I see is the commercial use of the material. As the judge said:
This case is distinctive in many respects from those which have come before it. It involves multiple copying. The copying was conducted by a commercial enterprise which claims an educational purpose for the materials. The copying was just that -- copying -- and did not "transform" the works in suit, that is, interpret them or add any value to the material copied, as would a biographer's or critic's use of a copyrighted quotation or excerpt. Because plaintiffs specifically allege violation of both, this court has the task of evaluating the copying under fair use doctrine and the "Agreement on Guidelines for Classroom Copying in Not-For-Profit Educational Institutions" ("Classroom Guidelines").

BTW, about a year ago, I tried to have make a single copy of an old 1926 sketch with a small bit of poetry that was copyrighted, and they would not do it without a release. However, they didn't stop me from using the self-serve machines.

[potlatch]

Free Republic is VERY alive, and VERY well - long may it live!

[A CA Guy]

Good for you Jim. The costs to continue in court are redicuous.

You have probably just added 50 future years to your life by getting out of court.

I am so happy for you and FR.

[HAL9000]

Judge Morrow wrote in her final opinion that FreeRepublic was "minimally commercial" that it exhibits many non-profit-like qualities, but was none-the-less "minimally commercial." Couldn't tell you offhand why for sure and don't want to make unsure guesses on this thread.

One of LAT/WP's arguments was that Free Republic was a commercial site because it used the dot-com top level domain.

Perhaps FR should have used the dot-org domain intended for not-for-profit organizations - like www.washingtonpost.org

Anyhow, I'm glad this thing is honorably settled.

[Grampa Dave]

Wrong! When we as conservatives don't subscribe nor buy their Bravo Sierra at a news stand, we have a big say. We are using the biggest weapon that we have the choice of what we read and buy what we do with those dollars when not spent on their fishwraps. Give that money saved to Free Republic each month.

When 100's of thousands and then millions of conservatives tell the DC Compost, the LA Slimes, the NY Slimes, The USA Today and other liberal fish wraps, we aren't paying you to stick a knife in our backs. They will start to head the way of the buggy whip makers when autos started to be popular in the first of the last century. The LA Slimes is really starting to hurt as more people are not buying their lies wrapped in fish wrap.

There is zero need in the life of a real conservative to read any of these left wing maggot infested fish wraps! That is the real power we have when we say no and spend our $'s previously spent on liberal fishwraps on supporting Free Republic with the monthly savings from cancelling their filth.

[patriciaruth]

Absolutely fabulous news!!! I don't have time to read 500 posts, but please let me know what the legal fees situation is with you now.

Cheers!
Patty

[ArneFufkin]

What you're advocating is copyright benefits for free information.

IT'S NOT FREE! ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Do you think news floats around in the air like magnetic waves or something?

Hey, Meyer .... step outside, take a sniff of the news, and come back and tell what's happening in Kabul this afternoon, ok? Oh, and if you could search around the cosmos for a channel, could you report on what's happening in the Knesset about retaliation for the latest murders?

Do any of you work?

[John Robinson]

LOL!

[capitan_refugio]

Well, I'll say this much. I dumped the LA Times and I'm not going to renew the subscription now. I get the Ventura Star, and although it is not the size of the Times, it at least has some reporting standards.

Last week the Time published an editorial on offshore oil and gas (the whole Sec. Norton vs Gov Davis thing). They made a factual error in EVERY paragraph! Screw 'em!!

[unsycophant]

Free the penguin.

Thanks in advance.

[L.N. Smithee]

So much for the "Free Republic Death Watch." Where's Chappell Aldridge? Where's Todd Fahey? I want to buy them a drink...NOT!!! And it looks like we will indeed outlast Salon, who took a nice hit in the shorts over their Deep Throat "revelation."

Congratulations, Jim. Thanks for everything.

[ArneFufkin]

You are wrong on the law, and your are wrong ethically. Your nitpicking is embarassing. Jim seems bitter in your estimation? I conclude you are a clueless judge of character and mettle. Jim's demeanor is serene and secure and humble, IMO. I know how he feels, it's tough opening every fat envelope from the courthouse or the bad guy's law office over a long period of time. But that's business if you're leading edge and scaring the big boys.

You know what my real problem is? There is an element here who value NOTHING outside their venal entitlements and grievences. They are incapable of nuance, discrimination or context. They appreciate no-one, they respect nothing and they believe in nothing.

And, they do nothing to support this site, either financially or as positive agents for change. I don't give a damn if you support Buchanan, Keyes, Phillips, Gore or Nader .... SUPPORT SOMETHING! Just being against Bush is no longer a position of respect. Because, it is now apparent that there are many who were against Bush the elder, Clinton, and Bush the younger. They are against everything, but that's not admirable. Knowing only what you are opposed to, feeling only that which imperils you, seeing only seige in the freest country in Human history is a sign of a emotional dysfunction - aka an insufferable prick.

I have never, in my life, encountered such a large group of absolutely graceless people. They are incapable of optimism or generosity. There's no upside to this crew. They pollute and poison everything in their proximity. They're dung beetles rolling the balls. Locusts.

I'd never hire these people for the most desperately needed job in my place. NEVER! Pernicious viruses to the team, all. This was a really positive thread, responding to really positive news and courageously wise management by the host, but you couldn't abide that uptempo mojo, could you Dave? You had to confront Jim with your injury and disillusionment. BIOYA. Jim is too kind to rebuke you, but your analysis of his options and legal standing was as compelling as Mike Tyson breaking down a chess move: "That horsth head isth asth big asth a casthle. Where'd the restht of histh body go ... heeeee?" The obsessive buzz killers are what annoy me about this place lately. It's like listening to a dentist drill.

Well, I can't change bitter hearts. I can, however, hit the link on every post I encounter to one of the smaller sites who serve us well. We should all return our productive gestures as people of honor, understanding and consrevative fellowship. Hit the damn link, even if the whole text is posted. I will.

[JohnHuang2]

[ArneFufkin]

Did the judge guide the parties to a settlement? Was she more equitable than first judged?

I'm very impressed. You guys did a remarkable job of negotiating. You and your Dad must have impressed the opposition legal team, because they could have drawn this thing out. They were obviously convinced of your intent and honor. I'm just happy for the emotional and physical well being of your family. It's tough to step back and take a sober look at your options. Lawsuits become emotional. Some folks lose themselves in the process, and some folks just go numb and ignore the details. And, attorneys aren't generally geared for shaking a client out of a stupor - they'd prefer to copy things, fax things and courier things to one another. I'm very relieved for your family.

[ArneFufkin]

Because a company invests millions of dollars in a product it has a natural right to it's every dividend

I'm not going to argue patent law. I'm not a lawyer. It's pretty simple to me though ... if you own a patent, you reap the dividends from that process, compostition or innovation as long as the patent is active. But, there is no dividend until someone decides that they want to buy the product or service borne through this innovation. That's not a given, observe any biomedical, pharmaceutical, software or entertainment company. WalMart buys a can of corn for 74 cents and sells it for 94 cents six days later. They need to make enough margin on all the stuff they sell to cover their expenses and make a targeted profit.

Merck has to spend tens of millions of dollars over several years in R&D, clinical testing, regulatory approval, market acceptance and production and logistic implementation before they make DOLLAR ONE. Even then, there might be something from Baxter that is similar that is better priced or marketed and causes a large negative ROI on Mercks new product. That's the way it goes in that business. They hunt and peck for the golden goose. That's why Merck and Upjohn need airtight patents, that's why Medtronic needs airtight patents, that's why Dupont and Johnson & Johnson and TRW need patents, and that's why Warner Brothers and Universal need copyright protections, and why musicians and Microsoft and Adobe need copyright protections, and why brandnames need Trademark protection, and media outlets need copyright protection on the material they gather, they write, they edit and they present as a distinct and unique product offering. It's the basis of our commercial law, and it is the engine that drives American innovation and technological advancement. It my competitor has a patent on process A to serve a market I need to get into, I'm going to push for the invention of process B. It's a pretty good system.

Carrier Pigeon, Newspaper, Fax on Demand or World Wide Web, this court case says that the presentation mileu is wholly irrelevant to the protection of the propreitary material. If Jim was funding this site out of pocket as a humanitarian gesture for the education and enlightenment of this Bowery, it would be a fair use case and his diversion from trafficking through the owners web site might be more valid. I'm not sure about that though. The internet presents a platform for the mass dissemination of proprietary information. Fair Use doctrine was developed around a physical media that had practical limitations on use. It's usually one person per paper per time. That's not a threat to the value of the information on a wide market scale. I don't think there will ever be a fair use exemption for copyright material on the Web ... any immediate and global presentation of copyright material that bypasses a copyright holders revenue opportunity is unfair. Jim could win the lottery and wish to sponser this site, but if he posts Washington Post copyright text he still is negatively influencing their business prospects. So, we go on. I assume if some other media outlet requests a cease and desist order, we'll comply. Frankly, I'd recommend just requiring that poster link a list of large media players like CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, Fox, Newsweek, CBS etc. ... it'll save a lot of grief and demonstrate to any future arbiter that we are serious about our legal responsibilites. Just put them on the link list up front.

[MeekOneGOP]

Well, the ladies make that picture, of course. Take me out and that
picture is pretty Dog-gone good, yep !