morning may please the court my name is joel joseph own arguing this case pro se i'm a writer besides being a lawyer i write books and articles to supplement my so income i regularly submit articles to newspapers across the united states where newspapers agree to publish an article except for the buffalo news they pay for it the buffalo news publish one  eds titled manufacturing taxes zero in its newspaper in print and then they published it online for more than six months they publish on line without my consent the buffalo news refused to pay me anything for either the publication in print or on line i obtained a copyright from the united states copyright office on this article the district court room easily ruled that my article was authorized by to see any versus new york times to be published without payment to see any rule to the contrary to see the supreme court ruling to see any that electronic publishing of an article must be expressly authorized i did not authorize the electronic publishing of the article i agreed only that the article could be published in print no price stronger you no longer concerned about the print publication i am concerned about that no price term was agreed to and i believe that there was no meeting of the minds under contract law and that a reasonable price could be implied but zero is not a reasonable price by any person's definition  yes i think they can authorize you to publish it without payment but if not you look did you did you indicate that if they published it they would bill you money no i didn't i did not why wouldn't you do submit when you want them to know that you are expecting to be paid to be published i think it's pretty obvious i ran out i don't think it is obvious you are arguing here right now about it well  every other newspaper does pay me and has paid me i ran a book publishing company for ten years and if somebody sent me a submission for a book of books books might be different but but what was it about your letter that put them on notice that you expect to be paid  wasn't a letter the submission that you made this mission it's traditional to suit makes it missing it's an industry standard it is an industry standard the new york i've been published in the new york times the standard is that they pay you one hundred and fifty dollars when it's published unless you have some other express terms i submitted an op ed to the new york times they said we agreed to publish it and they made a few editorial changes and they paid me i wrote op eds for usa today the same way sent them an article they published and they paid me this is the only new i've been published in three damages no no no would we go not that not the digital publishing but publishing in print well i had asked for statutory damages but at this point i understand that i'm entitle to actual damages so actual damages would be no mention was made anywhere of the electronic publication do they continue to publish an electronic lead after you after you objected to any publication or without payment yes they did for six dollars more than six months the buffalo news argue there was a letter to the editor and as and that it clearly wasn't it's a longer it's longer than a letter to the editor and they published in the newspaper that it was special to the news and not listen it wasn't listed as a letter to the editor i moved from ocean to leave to a man and that was denied and i believe it should have been granted under  man and rule that my copyright was a violation violated by publication in print and online and the rights of authors must be protected the constitution of the united states that article one section eight clause eight provides that congress has the power to enact legislation to promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective  writings my writings have not been protected i should be paid maybe it maybe i should have been paid one hundred dollars but i should been paid pursuant to the current constitution the cop congress passed the copyright act protecting my rights and i just see please the court bunch of thinking for defendant pollie the buffalo news as the district court properly noted the only issue really in this case is whether in point of had in his complaint or in his proposed amended complaint alleged that the buffalo news news had copied his article letter whatever you want to call it without authorization if you look at the four corners of the complaint or the proposed amended complaint it doesn't express we say that there was no authorization only that he wasn't paid now when you look at the complaint and references communications between the buffalo news and the plaintiff that refers to really a string of e mails that represents the entire transaction between them and at the end of that string of being e mails after the buffalo news is said and looks like we'll put it in the paper he responded great thanks absolutely right it's a this is a very clear very simple set of facts  restriction in terms of how it could be published whether it was restricted to print or line website to seanie the case that plaintiff relies on is factually different that case involved a public print publisher who had license agreements with specific freelance writers a group of them around twenty one dollars of them but then the print paper turned around and licensed those articles to nexus lexus a rd party database here we have authorization by plaintiffs to the buffalo news to publish in the buffalo news published that's that's it had the authority as you noted the there was if the initial submission of the the article to the buffalo news creates an implied license that alone i think would have authorized the use of the article here we have not only that but we have the express statement the buffalo news saying mr joseph we intend to publish your article and mr joseph responding great thanks without any restriction  requirement whatsoever isn't that ambiguous i don't fault you for interpretating it does as being an authorization but then after you published it in print and this is an authorization to publish without payment and when it does come up your honor when a dispute did come up when this issue was raised plaintiff did request payment our response to him was would you like us to remove your article from the site no response there was no response that whatsoever and there was never a specific objection to the fact that there was a print publication and a website publication website publication never came up until you meant the program posed a medic complaint there was never a specific objection to the fact that you offered to remove it from the ribs and you didn't you did not respond to it at all and that's on the record at sixty six dollars dash one as a dash thirty one dollars at the bottom of that page so very simply we have a very simple very singular look at those emails you have the original submission you have the express written authorization saying we can use it  contrary to what plaintiff says there doesn't have to be a written contract or an agreement to express payment terms except for a formation of a formal contract for the be a non exclusive license for permission to use it here we have a very simple set of facts as as plaintiff has said he's an experienced lawyer he's an experienced publisher would have been a very very simple thing to say when we asked we're going to publish an article for him to just say great thanks but it's going to cost you extra dollars would have been extremely simple that wasn't done it was  completely reasonable and with the permission granted for the buffalo news to publish the article that was enough for you to  i never authorized the electronic publication and i was never asked if they should stop the electronic publication is just the new digital version of the paper right that's right me like i get the i'm this was just the digital side of the buffalo evening news right now it's not quite the same because it stays stayed up on line for more than the day of publication it stayed up i don't know exactly but for more than one hundred and eighty days what are your ok what do you say about your your adversary said that that you offered to they sent you an email saying you want us to remove it from the digital and you didn't answer that i did not i don't recall getting that i don't i've never authorized them to do it you don't recall are you were asserting that there was no such email am asserting that yes it's certainly a factual question it's never been raised before that i authorized it by not responding to an e mail that's not i don't think that's fully in the record not to get statutory damages the statute says the cappie right must be registered no later than three months after they were expressed publication or within one month of learning of the infringement and it doesn't seem like you meet that condition i meet that for the electronic publication because they kept publishing it and i said for more than six months they did not need it for the print edition so you agree that your copper a claim for the print edition is and try this case up in buffalo and ask a jury in buffalo to give you a one hundred and fifty thousand dollars and claim that you take one hundred dollars for the value of your your work yes because i believe that will really supplement your social security it i'm not sure the jury would give me one hundred and fifty thousand dollars they wouldn't but i would think the people of buffalo would expect to get paid for their work thank you very much appreciate