HARPER & ROW, PUBLISHERS, INC., ET AL. v. NATION ENTERPRISES ET AL.
471 U.S. 539 (1985)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Harper (P) appealed a judgment in favor of Nation (D) in that D did
not infringe P's copyright because use of the material was excused by the public's interest
in the subject matter.
FACTS: President Ford made a deal with P to publish his as yet unwritten memoirs. They
were to contain 'significant hitherto unpublished material' concerning the Watergate crisis,
the pardon of President Nixon and 'Mr. Ford's reflections on this period of history, and the
morality and personalities involved.' The agreement gave P the exclusive right to license
prepublication excerpts, known in the trade as 'first serial rights.' P negotiated a
prepublication licensing agreement with Time, for $25,000 in two payments each $12,500 on
signing and on publication. Exclusivity was an important consideration and P instituted
procedures designed to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript. Two weeks before the
Time Article an unidentified person secretly brought a copy of the Ford manuscript to the
editor of D, a political commentary magazine. The editor knew that his possession of the
manuscript was not authorized and that the manuscript must be returned quickly to his
'source' to avoid discovery. The editor then hastily put together what he believed was 'a
real hot news story' composed of quotes, paraphrases, and facts drawn exclusively from the
manuscript. He attempted no independent commentary, research or criticism because of the
need for speed if he was to 'make news' by '[publishing] in advance of publication of the
Ford book.' As a result of D's article, Time canceled its piece and refused to pay the
remaining $ 12,500. P sued D alleging conversion, tortious interference with contract, and
violations of the Copyright Act. The District Court rejected D's argument that D's piece was
a 'fair use' sanctioned by 107 of the Act. The District Court held that it was 'the
totality of all the facts and memoranda collected together with Ford's reflections that made
them of value to D, [and] this . . . totality . . . is protected by the copyright laws.' P
got $12,500 actual damages.
The Court of Appeals reversed. They noted that copyright attaches to expression, not facts
or ideas. Examining the four factors enumerated in 107, the majority found the purpose of
the article was 'news reporting,' the original work was essentially factual in nature, the
300 words appropriated were insubstantial in relation to the 2,250-word piece, and the
impact on the market for the original was minimal as 'the evidence [did] not support a
finding that it was the very limited use of expression per se which led to Time's decision
not to print the excerpt.' P appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment