New-York tribune., 1918-12-24

of Associated Press papers to furnish
news, but refused to restrain the adj
mltted practice of the defendant in
Systematlcally pirating news from bull
letln boards and early editions, on the
ground that, while the court was salts
1ar trade, the legal question was one
OF hrst lmpiession and an Injunction
should await the outcome of an appeal.
injunction Order Sustained
both parties appealed, and the Cir
cunt Court Of Appeals not only sus-
tanned the injunction order issued. but
lemanded the case, with directions to
issue an injunction also against any
ocolly taxing of words or substance
OF complanants news until its value
OF news has passed away" The in
temporary, but they remain in effect
unless and until dissolved. If the
international News Service desires to
proceed further it may 90 into the
Olstrct Court with a motion to dis
solve. and ask that the case be heard
on ITS merits. AS virtually all essen
tiaI facts were admitted in the pre-
iiiiminaly proceedings, there would be
little Tor the court to hear if further
proceedings were undertaken.
Text of Majority Opinion
The text of the majority opinion fol-
lows, in part:
''The only matter that has been
argued before us is whether defendant
may unlawfully be restrained from an
propriatlng news taken from bulletins
ISSUED by complainant or any Of its
members or from newspapers pub
the newsgatherer; and, 3. whether de-
lng 1t to defendants clients. Com
plalnant asserts that defendants adj
mltted course Of conduct in this re-
gard both violates complainant's prop-
cry right IN the news and constitutes
unialr competition in business. And
Notwithstanding the case has proceed
eu only 10 the stage of preliminary
10 consider the underlying questions.
SINCE they go to the very merits of the
acCioh and are presented upon facts
that are not in dispute.
Three Questions Involved
AS presented IN argument these
questions are:
i. whether there is any property in
news; 2, whether. if there be pronertv
in news collected for the purnose of
BENG published, it survives the instant
OF It's publication in the first news
paper to which it is communicate bv
the newsgatherer; and 3, whether do.
1endant's admitted course of condnct
IN appropriating for commercial use
matter taken from bulletins or earjv
cations of Associated Press publica-
trade" ''O'' III
I'm considering the general question
or property in news matter, it is nee
essary to recognize it's dual character
olstlngulshlng between the substance
ol 1he h1ormatlon and the particular
form or collocation of words in which
the writer has communicated it.
we need spend no time, however
upon the general question of property
appllcatlon OF the copyright act, since
1t seems to us the case must turn
upon the question of unfair compc-
titlon in business. And in our opinion
'nlS does not depend upon any general
rlght OF property analogous TO the
common law right of the proprietor of
an unpublished work to prevent it's
publlcatlon without his consent; nor
IS 1t foreclosed by showing that the
waived. ''' "eo'
-, Inc peculiar value of news is in
the spreading of it, while it is fresh;
ana 1T is evident that a valuable prom
efty interest IN the news, as news. can
not be maintained by keeping it secret
besldes. except for matters improper-
~ dIsclosed, or published in breach Of
trust or confidence, or in violation of
law, none of whicn is involved in this (
nranch or the case, the news of cur
rent events may be regarded as com
mon property"
Regarding the taking of Associated
rfess news from bulletin boards and
early editions of Associated Press
newspapers and selling to its own
clients, the court said
Unfair Competition"
THE right Of the purchaser of
'ngle newspaper to spread knowledge
OF ITS contents gratuitously for anv
legitmatc purpose not unreasonable
nterier NC with compainant's right
10 make merchandise of it NAV be
tomltted; but to transmit that news
or commercial use in competition With
complainant which is what defendant
'as done and seeks to iustifv-is a
cry dlfferent matter Strjnnod
u all disguises the process amounts
% % an unauthorized interference with
ne normal operation of complainant's
eg''imate business, precisely at tho
'clh' "here the profit is to be reaped
=, with special advantage to
'e1endant in the competition because
u the fact that it is not bnrdennd
u Itn any part of the expense of gath.
ing me news. The transaction speak