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

[Jim Robinson]

Well, most of us are in favor of the constitutionally limited government as established by our founders. However, we all have differing ideas and priorities of how to go about restoring it. Many of us (I'd say the vast majority) realize the realities and impossiblities of getting it all back in one big gulp. Despite Harry Browne's boasts and claims, even if he could get elected, he would not be able to dismantle the existing government by lunch. In fact, if he tried, he'd probably be impeached by dinner. Jim

[codebreaker]

Yup indeed, the Washington Compost blinked and backed down.

[afraidfortherepublic]

Congratulations!

[CedarDave]

Thanks for your response to JoeEveryman. It answered many
of my questions too. And I've calmed down from my emotional
(liberal?) response when I first read of the settlement as
this being only a "loss". We survive to fight another day.

[targetpractice]

"There is something being lost in the case of many of the papers - The loss of archiving. The information often leaves the site daily at some of these newspaper web sites. And when it is gone, there's no way to find it unless you go to the library and look it up (for free) or pay to access the information at the paper's web site at a future date."

That, of course, is the point. Retrieving archived articles is a potential revenue stream for the publishers. After all, the content is their product and was developed at their expense. You have the option to pay for the retrieval or go down to the library if you want to save money. The entire reason publishers exist, hire reporters, write stories, build web sites, and print newspapers is to make money -- not to provide gratis discussion material. The archive retrieval fee is for the value and convenience of avoiding a trip to the library.

If Freepers truly prefer to read WP or LAT content only on this site, then I'll bet there is a license deal that could be made between freerepublic.com and the publishers. After all, publishers are in the business of licensing their content. It doesn't seem like this approach was explored. Instead, it seems that the FR position was to argue copyrighted material was free to take.

[B. A. Conservative]

"Restoring respect for the constitution is a worthy replacement for opposition to Clinton. Partisan party politics are not,.."

I would suggest that Constitutional restoration is not possible without the political defeat of the Democratic Party. Granted the Republicans have some areas of assault on the Constitution, but the gross rapes of the Constitution have occured from liberals who live in the Democratic Party.

[Tribune7]

That's exactly right! Facts can't be copyrighted.

If it's an exclusive one can always rewrite the articles from the dinosaurs by putting the saliant info in a who/what/where/why/when/how post. (It's very easy to do.)

And it may not even be necessary to provide a link, which should be avoided since it's doing the dinos a favor.

[Bryan]

Well, since we are "minimally commercial," I think we should turn it to our advantage. A display ad with a link to Amazon, for such books as Bias, Hell to Pay, The Final Days, The Decline of the West and Ten Things You Can Never Say In America would gain Free Republic a 15% commission for every book sold through the link.

Such display ads should be kept off the threads to keep the "minimally commercial" thing going and avoid making any of our members mad. But it could be put on the homepage, the "Self-Search" page and the "Latest Posts" pages. There are a lot of options and this is just one of them.

Since we have the name, we might as well have the game.

[codebreaker]

LOL! I don't know, I could see a Supreme Court free speech coalition between future Justices Rivera, Van Sustern, TLB Show, Coulter and Estrich.

Those liberals are religious about the 1st amendment..

[Jim Robinson]

"Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel unless you have servers with terrabyte capacity."

Now you tell me.

Thanks,

Jim

[dighton]

Splendid.

A champagne toast to you; cyanide (I'll gladly pay) for E*****r and company.

[Jim Robinson]

"Is it 9:30 yet?"

Getting close.... tick...tock...

[John Robinson]

Well, I had more in mind some type of program that would automatically document changes to an article's words by comparing a saved copy with a freshly downloaded copy. Any changes to the document would be made public. And some way to find the URL of articles if they've moved. More than likely, these spiders would have to be custom built for each site and each format change of those sites. A non-trivial task which would end up a community programming project. Spiders aren't very difficult to write, but hundreds of spider programs for sites with varying structure could consume thousands of hours.

[meyer]

That, of course, is the point. Retrieving archived articles is a potential revenue stream for the publishers.

But the fact is that it is free in the library. Free to copy and free to discuss with NO revenue stream to the original paper. Plus, it is archived on fishtape or whatever they use now. And it isn't much of an inconvenience to go to the library and look it up.

But it isn't about convenience anyway. It is about an old technology trying to resist the new. The printing press ticked off a whole gang of copywriters, but it eventually replaced the pen and paper as a means of passing on information. Likewise, the internet is doing the same to the printed copy and that includes the library. Freerepublic is just an extension of the library and ones' circle of friends.

[Jim Robinson]

"Despite all the rancor, Jim, all the ill will and bitterness over this campaign of petty bullying by the Post and Times, I think it is time to bury the hatchet and send along my best regards to the ongoing health, happiness and impeccable journalistic integrity of Katie Graham, William Rasberry and Ben Bradlee."

Yes, they should all receive the Clymer award for exellence in Journalism.

Thanks,

Jim

[John Robinson]

I want to have a book review section, and recommended reading in user profiles. Each with purchasing links through Amazon.com (or one of the others.) It wouldn't bring in much, but it certainly wouldn't hurt. (On the order of several good size monthly donations.) And it would not be banner ads!

[Jim Robinson]

"I would suggest that Constitutional restoration is not possible without the political defeat of the Democratic Party. Granted the Republicans have some areas of assault on the Constitution, but the gross rapes of the Constitution have occured from liberals who live in the Democratic Party."

Wow! Am I ever glad you posted that. That's exactly what needs to be done in the next three or four election cycles. Demolish the Democrats!

Thanks,

Jim

[tpaine]

"Well, most of us are in favor of the constitutionally limited government as established by our founders. However, we all have differing ideas and priorities of how to go about restoring it. Many of us (I'd say the vast majority) realize the realities and impossiblities of getting it all back in one big gulp."

------ Of course we realise that it ain't gonna happen overnite. But politics as usual won't make it happen either. And FR is definitly not 'usual', -- so far anyway. You can keep it that way, -- or not. -------

"Despite Harry Browne's boasts and claims, even if he could get elected, he would not be able to dismantle the existing government by lunch. In fact, if he tried, he'd probably be impeached by dinner." Jim

------- I've never been a big fan of Harry, or his 'dismantling' rhetotic. - As you said earlier, that kinda crap just puts us at each others throats.

---

[Bryan]

Full-text posting definitely served its purpose while it lasted. It revealed the left-wing bias of the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times and the rest of the liberal press, during a very critical time in our nation's history: from the Clinton impeachment through the 2000 campaign.

We'll do just fine without it. And I'm confident that this constitutional issue will arise again and it will be successfully resolved by someone else with deeper pockets, or a stronger case. Free Republic didn't file as a non-profit in a timely fashion and that hurt us. Judge Morrow's original decision should be viewed as a map of the liberal minefield. The next site that takes on the liberal press will know where the land mines are, and how to step over them.

It's gonna be good.

[BluesDuke]

Splendid news! :)