Copyright Infringement complaint from Vanity Fair/Condé Nast

Email

[Jim Robinson]

Subject: Copyright Infringement

Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 15:42:53 -0400

From: "Gigante, John D."

To: "'WEBMASTER@FREEREPUBLIC.COM'" WEBMASTER@FREEREPUBLIC.COM

September 23, 2003

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, AND BY E-MAIL TO WEBMASTER@FREEREPUBLIC.COM Free Republic, LLC P.O. Box 9771 Fresno, CA 93794

Re: Copyright Infringement Dear Sir or Madam:

We represent The Conde Nast Publications, publisher of Vanity Fair. It has come to our attention that your website posted and continues to post without permission at least two copies of an article entitled "The Message in the Anthrax" written by Don Foster for the October 2003 issue of Vanity Fair.

Mr. Foster owns the copyright in this article and Vanity Fair paid for the exclusive right to publish the article for a limited period of time. As the copyright owner, Mr. Foster has the legally enforceable right to determine who, if anyone, may publish the article, and during the period of its exclusivity, Vanity Fair has the legally protectable right to be the only party publishing the article.

Your reproduction of this article on your site (even if it was posted by third parties) is an infringement by you of Mr. Foster's copyright rights and, since your infringement continues to occur during the period of Vanity Fair's exclusivity, it also violates Conde Nast's rights. The remedies available under the U.S. Copyright Act are severe, including injunctive relief, payment of statutorily-prescribed damages of up to $150,000 per infringement, and reimbursement of attorneys' fees.

We demand that you immediately remove from your website all materials from Vanity Fair and any other Conde Nast publication, and that you provide us with a written statement specifying all of the material removed, and that you agree not to use any Conde Nast material in the future unless you first obtain the copyright owner's written permission (which may be granted or withheld). If you do not agree, we will advise our client it must pursue more formal means to resolve this problem. We expect to hear from you within ten (10) days of your receipt of this letter.

Sincerely,

John Gigante, Esq. Sabin, Bermant & Gould LLP Four Times Square New York, N. Y. 10036-6526 Tel. 212-381-7066 Fax. 212-381-7227

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, purge it and do not disseminate or copy it.

[Jim Robinson]

Please do not post materials from Vanity Fair or any other Conde Nast Publication.

Thanks,

Jim

[b4its2late]

Yes Sir!

[BunnySlippers]

Gotcha. Bump.

[TheBigB]

I think this was asked about the Onion posts, but I don't know if it was settled...what about excerpts?

[finnman69]

It sounds like the LWers are writing magazines to report posting of their articles to get FR in trouble.

[MineralMan]

"Please do not post materials from Vanity Fair or any other Conde Nast Publication. "

Jim,

This is the second one of these recently. I wonder if someone is ratting out FR to publications. It's possible that it's just a coincidence, but....

[AppyPappy]

They came after me one time for something I posted on the church website from something I got in an email. I didn't even know the source. They need something to do.

[finnman69]

Quesiton. Is this ALL material or can material be briefly excerpted. What about photos from Vanity Fair such as a the Bill Clinton crotch shot cover?

[Fred Mertz]

How vain....sheesh.

[ambrose]

Why on Earth would anyone post anything from that rag in the first place?

[AppyPappy]

You also may want to remove your email address so the spambots don't pick it up.

[kimmie7]

Good grief, is that thing still being printed? No problems not posting from them here.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Thats a pretty big list.

Includes all publications listed to left on this link. Especially applicable for FReepers are Wired, Conde Nast Traveler, New Yorker and GQ.

[Ff--150]

Like I said: WE're at war, but don't seem to realize that. They're going after this forum as well. (And "we're in power")

[piasa]

Could you post the list of "no" sources on the posting page... and does VF have a list of associated publications? Sometimes it's hard to tell what belongs to what publisher.

[TheBigB]

Nothing else from Teen Vogue? Strike me dead now....

[Shermy]

Ping.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

How'd you do that? I tried looking at the source and gave up.

[piasa]

Small loss, there...

[=Intervention=]

Is there a list somewhere of the mags and the excerpting rules? That would be a good page to have.

[AppyPappy]

You just broke the rule. I'm tellin'.

[LibertyAndJusticeForAll]

Thanks for the list.

[July 4th]

A lot of stuff here is from Wired. That sucks.

[isthisnickcool]

Maybe it might be a good idea to generate a drop-down list of publications that should not be linked to. On the input page for posting?

[Jim Robinson]

They said links only.

[Bikers4Bush]

That is no doubt what is happening.

[RightWhale]

Conde Nast publishes Wired and New Yorker among a variety of less important magazines. Wired was hot a couple years ago, but it's Tired now. New Yorker is great, but wouldn't be of much interest at FR anyway. Shouldn't be a problem.

[Defiant]

Good riddance, Vanity Fair.

[Mears]

The last time I looked VF was 80% advertising(I'm estimating here),15% Hollywood and Beautiful People gossip,and 5% newsworthy articles.

No posting,no problem!

[TheBigB]

Okay!

[2nd amendment mama]

I wonder if these publications have sent the same letters to all the "leftist/socialist" sites????? Might have a claim for discrimination....hehehehehe

[Bon mots]

Well, let's just boycott the advertisers who support that worthless rag. Can we get a list and concentrate on just one publication?

Now just who would advertise in something like "Vanity Fair"?

[Beelzebubba]

I think someone has set up a list of no-no publications (can someone provide a link?) It might make sense to put this list on the FR home page.

What would be really nifty is a feature that scans the "source" line, and if it finds a match with a prohibited publication, it warns the poster to do an excerpt.

[MetalHeadConservative35]

i think youre right...this is our enemies doin this

[AppyPappy]

Note: It IS legal to summarize the article, referring to only the important parts. You cannot cut and paste but you can explain what is in the article in your own words.

[jellybean]

I'm curious. Do all those publications who troll through FR and lift quotes from FReepers request permission from you or the poster to use their quotes?

[dighton]

Architectural Digest
allure
Bon Appétit
Bride’s
Condé Nast Traveler
Glamour
Gourmet
GQ
House & Garden
Lucky
ModernBride
Self
The New Yorker
teen Vogue
Vanity Fair
Vogue
Wired

[Mears]

Hey! Wait a minute,what about Modern Bride? I may be old but hope springs eternal------.

[Defiant]

Fair use allows you to quote a little bit, too, but if the authorities that be only want us to link, that's what we should do.

[Peach]

Actually, you have a good point. I know there are other sites that don't have this problem posting articles.

[4CJ]

Like I said: WE're at war, but don't seem to realize that. They're going after this forum as well. (And "we're in power")

Could be we're hitting a nerve? ;o)

[Fester Chugabrew]

"Mr. Foster owns the copyright in this article and Vanity Fair paid for the exclusive right to publish the article for a limited period of time."

I don't think that's S.O.P. for most publications, or even Vanity Fair. This article must be a special case. How would anyone know about the exclusive arrangement and time limit? There are also legal remedies that would allow for posting any length of any material on FR, i.e. compulsory licensing, and it may be worth looking into that expense. I don't think it would all that great.

[geedee]

Good list . . . perhaps a good way to show the info-narcs that we don't appreciate their nonsense is for all FReepers who are buying any of the Conde trash to cancel their subscriptions along with a nice little note explaining why.

If you know . . . What are the copyright laws anyway? For example, Ann Coulter writes a book . . . or a newspaper column. A gazillion people quote from it. Are they all breaking the law since she, obviously, hasn't given them all permission? Or is there some kind of "blanket" permission that's allowed?

[Centurion2000]

This is the second one of these recently. I wonder if someone is ratting out FR to publications. It's possible that it's just a coincidence, but....

For once I agree with you .... three times is enemy action. Guess time will tell.

[freedom4ever]

I have a funny feeling this going to get worse. I hope it doesn't, but I just have a bad feeling more publications will start doing this. One thing we can do is put Free
Republic members out there as reporters and report the news, honestly, as it happens, before the spin begins. There are a lot of us, all over the country/ world and we often times beat the competition to the headlines. I think we could go to the next level. Seriously, what would prevent us from obtaining press passes at events?

[cwb]

Yep...and beware the infiltrators who may ignore the rules and post just to get the site in trouble. Everyone has to keep an eye open. That gives me an idea...DUhh. Just kidding.

[MissAmericanPie]

Is it legal to summarize an article? Once in print, information has been made public domain, or it should be that way.

So how about it? Summarize the content for discussion and provide a link to the article? Is that allowed?

[dighton]

If you know . . . What are the copyright laws anyway?

Not an attorney, what to speak of a copyright attorney. Way out of my depth.