Source: https://es.scribd.com/document/120292766/471-U-S-539
Timestamp: 2018-02-23 03:06:52
Document Index: 10654350

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 107', '§ 106', '§ 107', '§ 106', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 106', '§ 107', '§ 106', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 106', '§ 107', '§ 102', '§ 8', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 106', '§ 106', '§ 2', '§ 106', '§ 2', '§ 13', '§ 8', '§ 13', '§ 106', '§ 106', '§ 107', 'art 2', '§ 107', '§ 106', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 107', '§ 1', '§ 102', '§ 1', '§ 107', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 107', '§ 101', '§ 1', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 14', '§ 504', '§ 504', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 2', '§ 102', '§ 8', '§ 107', '§ 106', '§ 106', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 13', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 13', '§ 107', '§ 107', '§ 13', '§ 107']

Cargado por Nineteen
Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises - 471 U.S.
539 (1985) Syllabus In 1977, former President Ford contracted with petitioners to publish his as yet unwritten memoirs. The agreement gave petitioners the exclusive first serial right to license prepublication excerpts. Two years later, as the memoirs were nearing completion, petitioners, as the copyright holders, negotiated a prepublication licensing agreement with Time Magazine under which Time agreed to pay $25,000 ($12,500 in advance and the balance at publication) in exchange for the right to excerpt 7,500 words from Mr. Ford's account of his pardon of former President Nixon. Shortly before the Time article's scheduled release, an unauthorized source provided The Nation Magazine with the unpublished Ford manuscript. Working directly from this manuscript, an editor of The Nation produced a 2,250-word article, at least 300 to 400 words of which consisted of verbatim quotes of copyrighted expression taken from the manuscript. It was timed to "scoop" the Time article. As a result of the publication of The Nation's article, Time canceled its article and refused to pay the remaining $12,500 to petitioners. Petitioners then brought suit in Federal District Court against respondent publishers of The Nation, alleging, inter alia, violations of the Copyright Act (Act). The District Court held that the Ford memoirs were protected by copyright at the time of The Nation publication, and that respondents' use of the copyrighted material constituted an infringement under the Act, and the court awarded actual damages of $12,500. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that The Nation's publication of the 300 to 400 words it identified as copyrightable expression was sanctioned as a "fair use" of the copyrighted material under § 107 of the Act. Section 107 provides that, notwithstanding the provisions of § 106 giving a copyright owner the exclusive right to reproduce the copyrighted work and to prepare derivative works based on the copyrighted work, the fair use of a copyrighted work for purposes such as comment and news reporting is not an infringement of copyright. Section 107 further provides that, in determining whether the use was fair, the factors to be considered shall include: (1) the purpose and character of the use; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the substantiality of the portion used in relation to the Page 471 U. S. 540 copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. Held: The Nation's article was not a "fair use" sanctioned by § 107. Pp. 471 U. S. 542-569. (a) In using generous verbatim excerpts of Mr. Ford's unpublished expression to lend authenticity to its account of the forthcoming memoirs, The Nation effectively arrogated to itself the right of first publication, an important marketable subsidiary right. Pp. 471 U. S. 545-549. (b) Though the right of first publication, like other rights enumerated in § 106, is expressly made subject to the fair use provisions of 107, fair use analysis must always be tailored to the individual case. The nature of the interest at stake is highly relevant to whether a given use is fair. The unpublished nature of a work is a key, though not necessarily determinative, factor tending to negate a defense of fair use. And under ordinary circumstances, the author's right to control the first public appearance of his undisseminated expression will outweigh a claim of fair use. Pp. 471 U. S. 549-555. (c) In view of the First Amendment's protections embodied in the Act's distinction between copyrightable expression and uncopyrightable facts and ideas, and the latitude for scholarship and comment traditionally afforded by fair use, there is no warrant for expanding, as respondents contend should be done, the fair use doctrine to what amounts to a public figure exception to copyright. Whether verbatim copying from a public figure's manuscript in a given case is or is not fair must be judged according to the traditional equities of fair use. Pp. 471 U. S. 555-560. (d) Taking into account the four factors enumerated in § 107 as especially relevant in determining fair use leads to the conclusion that the use in question here was not fair. (i) The fact that news reporting was the general purpose of The Nation's use is simply one factor. While The Nation had every right to be the first to publish the information, it went beyond simply reporting uncopyrightable information and actively sought to exploit the headline value of its infringement, making a "news event" out of its unauthorized first publication. The fact that the publication was commercial, as opposed to nonprofit, is a separate factor tending to weigh against a finding of fair use. Fair use presupposes good faith. The Nation's unauthorized use of the undisseminated manuscript had not merely the incidental effect, but the intended purpose, of supplanting the copyright holders' commercially valuable right of first publication. (ii) While there may be a greater need to disseminate works of fact than works of fiction, The Nation's taking of copyrighted expression exceeded that necessary to disseminate the facts, and infringed the copyright holders' interests in confidentiality and creative control over the first public appearance of the work. (iii) Although the verbatim quotes Page 471 U. S. 541
in question were an insubstantial portion of the Ford manuscript, they qualitatively embodied Mr. Ford's distinctive expression, and played a key role in the infringing article. (iv) As to the effect of The Nation's article on the market for the copyrighted work, Time's cancellation of its projected article and its refusal to pay $12,500 were the direct effect of the infringing publication. Once a copyright holder establishes a causal connection between the infringement and loss of revenue, the burden shifts to the infringer to show that the damage would have occurred had there been no taking of copyrighted expression. Petitioners established a prima facie case of actual damage that respondents failed to rebut. More important, to negate a claim of fair use, it need only be shown that, if the challenged use should become widespread, it would adversely affect the potential market for the copyrighted work. Here, The Nation's liberal use of verbatim excerpts posed substantial potential for damage to the marketability of first serialization rights in the copyrighted work. Pp. 471 U. S. 560-569. 723 F.2d 195, reversed and remanded. O'CONNOR, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and BLACKMUN, POWELL, REHNQUIST, and STEVENS, JJ., joined. BRENNAN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which WHITE and MARSHALL, JJ., joined, post, p. 471 U. S. 579. Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus In 1977, former President Ford contracted with petitioners to publish his as yet unwritten memoirs. The agreement gave petitioners the exclusive first serial right to license prepublication excerpts. Two years later, as the memoirs were nearing completion, petitioners, as the copyright holders, negotiated a prepublication licensing agreement with Time Magazine under which Time agreed to pay $25,000 ($12,500 in advance and the balance at publication) in exchange for the right to excerpt 7,500 words from Mr. Ford's account of his pardon of former President Nixon. Shortly before the Time article's scheduled release, an unauthorized source provided The Nation Magazine with the unpublished Ford manuscript. Working directly from this manuscript, an editor of The Nation produced a 2,250-word article, at least 300 to 400 words of which consisted of verbatim quotes of copyrighted expression taken from the manuscript. It was timed to "scoop" the Time article. As a result of the publication of The Nation's article, Time canceled its article and refused to pay the remaining $12,500 to petitioners. Petitioners then brought suit in Federal District Court against respondent publishers of The Nation, alleging, inter alia, violations of the Copyright Act (Act). The District Court held that the Ford memoirs were protected by copyright at the time of The Nation publication, and that respondents' use of the copyrighted material constituted an infringement under the Act, and the court awarded actual damages of $12,500. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that The Nation's publication of the 300 to 400 words it identified as copyrightable expression was sanctioned as a "fair use" of the copyrighted material under § 107 of the Act. Section 107 provides that, notwithstanding the provisions of § 106 giving a copyright owner the exclusive right to reproduce the copyrighted work and to prepare derivative works based on the copyrighted work, the fair use of a copyrighted work for purposes such as comment and news reporting is not an infringement of copyright. Section 107 further provides that, in determining whether the use was fair, the factors to be considered shall include: (1) the purpose and character of the use; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the substantiality of the portion used in relation to the Page 471 U. S. 540 copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. Held: The Nation's article was not a "fair use" sanctioned by § 107. Pp. 471 U. S. 542-569. (a) In using generous verbatim excerpts of Mr. Ford's unpublished expression to lend authenticity to its account of the forthcoming memoirs, The Nation effectively arrogated to itself the right of first publication, an important marketable subsidiary right. Pp. 471 U. S. 545-549. (b) Though the right of first publication, like other rights enumerated in § 106, is expressly made subject to the fair use provisions of 107, fair use analysis must always be tailored to the individual case. The nature of the interest at stake is highly relevant to whether a given use is fair. The unpublished nature of a work is a key, though not necessarily determinative, factor
Here. as opposed to nonprofit. and infringed the copyright holders' interests in confidentiality and creative control over the first public appearance of the work. The fact that the publication was commercial. I In February. and Reader's Digest Association. J." The piece was timed to "scoop" an article scheduled shortly to appear in Time Magazine. joined. 471 U. BRENNAN. S. As a result of The Nation article. joined. 541 in question were an insubstantial portion of the Ford manuscript. (ii) While there may be a greater need to disseminate works of fact than works of fiction. Inc. Pp. More important. Petitioners established a prima facie case of actual damage that respondents failed to rebut. (iv) As to the effect of The Nation's article on the market for the copyrighted work. Pp. Ford's pardon of former President Nixon.. post. making a "news event" out of its unauthorized first publication. in which WHITE and MARSHALL. Ford's distinctive expression. 17 U. Mr. and STEVENS. as respondents contend should be done. and played a key role in the infringing article. an editor of The Nation produced a short piece entitled "The Ford Memoirs -.. Fair use presupposes good faith. § 107.. 1979. p. there is no warrant for expanding. And under ordinary circumstances. of supplanting the copyright holders' commercially valuable right of first publication. shortly after leaving the White House. Once a copyright holder establishes a causal connection between the infringement and loss of revenue. The Nation's taking of copyrighted expression exceeded that necessary to disseminate the facts. S. This case requires us to consider to what extent the "fair use" provision of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976 (hereinafter Page 471 U. and BLACKMUN. (c) In view of the First Amendment's protections embodied in the Act's distinction between copyrightable expression and uncopyrightable facts and ideas. 579. 542 the Copyright Act). REHNQUIST. (hereinafter Harper & Row).S. We granted certiorari.S. it need only be shown that.500 were the direct effect of the infringing publication. the burden shifts to the infringer to show that the damage would have occurred had there been no taking of copyrighted expression. Harper & Row Publishers. In March. an undisclosed source provided The Nation Magazine with the unpublished manuscript of "A Time to Heal: The Autobiography of Gerald R. The memoirs were to contain "significant hitherto unpublished material" concerning the Watergate crisis. C. (iii) Although the verbatim quotes Page 471 U. 471 U." Working directly from the purloined manuscript. the Second Circuit reversed the lower court's finding of infringement. but the intended purpose. to publish his as yet unwritten memoirs. delivered the opinion of the Court. S.. Ford contracted with petitioners Harper & Row and Reader's Digest. 560-569. (i) The fact that news reporting was the general purpose of The Nation's use is simply one factor. former President Gerald R. Inc.Behind the Nixon Pardon.2d 195. holding that The Nation's act was sanctioned as a "fair use" of the copyrighted material. Time's cancellation of its projected article and its refusal to pay $12. 723 F. Petitioners brought a successful copyright action against The Nation. Ford's reflections .J. The Nation's unauthorized use of the undisseminated manuscript had not merely the incidental effect. if the challenged use should become widespread. POWELL. the fair use doctrine to what amounts to a public figure exception to copyright. On appeal. (hereinafter Reader's Digest). JUSTICE O'CONNOR delivered the opinion of the Court.. JJ. 471 U. Time had agreed to purchase the exclusive right to print prepublication excerpts from the copyright holders. S. to negate a claim of fair use. While The Nation had every right to be the first to publish the information. S. Ford. 467 U.C. S. JJ. filed a dissenting opinion. Time canceled its agreement. O'CONNOR. in which BURGER. it went beyond simply reporting uncopyrightable information and actively sought to exploit the headline value of its infringement. they qualitatively embodied Mr. the author's right to control the first public appearance of his undisseminated expression will outweigh a claim of fair use. 555-560.tending to negate a defense of fair use. J. 549-555. 471 U. The Nation's liberal use of verbatim excerpts posed substantial potential for damage to the marketability of first serialization rights in the copyrighted work. Whether verbatim copying from a public figure's manuscript in a given case is or is not fair must be judged according to the traditional equities of fair use. and "Mr. and we now reverse. 1214 (1984). is a separate factor tending to weigh against a finding of fair use. sanctions the unauthorized use of quotations from a public figure's unpublished manuscript. reversed and remanded. Pp. and the latitude for scholarship and comment traditionally afforded by fair use. (d) Taking into account the four factors enumerated in § 107 as especially relevant in determining fair use leads to the conclusion that the use in question here was not fair. it would adversely affect the potential market for the copyrighted work. 1977.
1069 (SDNY 1983). Time agreed to pay $25. C-29 . the agreement gave petitioners the exclusive right to license prepublication excerpts. He hastily put together what he believed was "a real hot news story" composed of quotes. paraphrases. Mr. and (3).2d 195. to avoid granting a copyright monopoly over the facts underlying history and news. not facts or ideas.C-15. and the right of first distribution of Page 471 U. Ibid. 544 the copyrighted work to the public. known in the trade as "first serial rights. totality . such as historical facts and memoranda." taking "the heart" of "a soon-to-be published" work." Two years later. "`expression' [in such works must be confined] to its barest elements -. After a 6-day bench trial. and violations of the Copyright Act. S. A divided panel of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed. The District Court rejected respondents' argument that The Nation's piece was a "fair use" sanctioned by § 107 of the Act. Though billed as "hot news. Ford's impressionistic depictions of Nixon. at 1072. is protected by the copyright laws. to Pet.Supp.500. at 1072-1073. in exchange for the right to excerpt 7. the article in The Nation contains. such as historical facts. The court awarded actual damages of $12.C-30. But it held that the District Court had erred in assuming the "coupling [of these reflections] with uncopyrightable fact transformed that information into a copyrighted totality. 1067. for Cert.500 at publication.on this period of history. Ford's verbatim "reflections" were original "expression" protected by copyright. as the memoirs were nearing completion. the right to license preparation of derivative works. the District Judge found that "A Time to Heal" was protected by copyright at the time of The Nation publication and that respondents' use of the copyrighted material constituted an infringement under the Copyright Act. §§ 106(1). Mr. at 204. editor of The Nation.500 words from Mr. S. the District Court held that it was "the totality of these facts and memoranda collected. . Navasky knew that his possession of the manuscript was not authorized." Id. and Time retained the right to renegotiate the second payment should the material appear in print prior to its release of the excerpts.500 in advance and an Page 471 U.'" 723 F. This unauthorized use "caused the Time agreement to be aborted. Harper & Row instituted procedures designed to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript. petitioners negotiated a prepublication licensing agreement with Time. (2). "When the uncopyrighted material is stripped away. 557 F. at most. Ford's account of the Nixon pardon." App. must be disregarded in evaluating whether the second author's use was fair or infringing. to Pet." Id. and the morality and personalities involved. $12. The majority noted that copyright attaches to expression. As a result of The Nation's article. memoranda and other public documents. together with Ford's reflections. in part because of the need for speed if he was to "make news" by "publish[ing] in advance of publication of the Ford book. that made them of value to The Nation. Thus similarities between the original and the challenged work traceable to the copying or paraphrasing of uncopyrightable material.the ordering and choice of the words themselves. It concluded that. . and thus diminished the value of the copyright.000." the article contained no new facts. appeared on April 3. They include a short segment of Ford's conversations with Henry Kissinger and several other individuals. approximately Page 471 U. tortious interference with contract. .Supp. Petitioners brought suit in the District Court for the Southern District of New York. Two to three weeks before the Time article's scheduled release. and that the manuscript must be returned quickly to his "source" to avoid discovery." 557 F." App.250-word article. research or criticism. Navasky attempted no independent commentary. 543 additional $12. The majority recognized that Mr. 1979. 416-417. a political commentary magazine.500. These remaining paragraphs and scattered phrases are all verbatim quotations from the memoirs which had not appeared previously in other publications. . C-14 . App. The 2. were not per se copyrightable. S. reprinted in the Appendix to this opinion. The issue featuring the excerpts was timed to appear approximately one week before shipment of the full-length book version to bookstores. In addition to the right to publish the Ford memoirs in book form. Exclusivity was an important consideration. The magazine had "published its article for profit. [and] this . a weekly news magazine. 205 (1983). Time canceled its piece and refused to pay the remaining $12. alleging conversion. an unidentified person secretly brought a copy of the Ford manuscript to Victor Navasky. Although certain elements of the Ford memoirs. and quoted remarks of third parties. ill with phlebitis after the resignation . protecting respectively the right to reproduce the work. and facts drawn exclusively from the manuscript. 545 300 words that are copyrighted. for Cert.
The copyright is limited to those aspects of the work -. Creation of a nonfiction work. by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries. Schroeder v. and to allow the public access to the products of their genius after the limited period of exclusive control has expired. Article I. S.that display the stamp of the author's originality. Examining the four factors enumerated in § 107. S. . and the impact on the market for the original was minimal. which codifies the traditional privilege of other authors to make "fair use" of an earlier writer's work. entails originality. S." the original work was essentially factual in nature. § 102." Id. . 417. 546 fostering the original works that provide the seed and substance of this harvest.. William Morrow & Co. the 300 words appropriated were insubstantial in relation to the 2. Sarony. It is intended to motivate the creative activity of authors and inventors by the provision of a special reward.vest in the author of an original work from the time of its creation. . 422 U.2d 3 (CA7 1977) (copyright in gardening directory). [Footnote 1] Under the Copyright Page 471 U. however. "The monopoly created by copyright thus rewards the individual author in order to benefit the public.2d at 208. 2. the majority found the purpose of the article was "news reporting. to Promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts. § 8. of the Constitution provides: "The Congress shall have Power . n. 151.to publish. and distribute the author's work -. e. 547 Act." As we noted last Term: "[This] limited grant is a means by which an important public purpose may be achieved. Section 106 of the Copyright Act confers a bundle of exclusive rights to the owner of the copyright. 53. see infra at 471 U. It is these parts of the magazine piece on which [the court] must focus in [its] examination of the question whether there was a 'fair use' of copyrighted matter." The Nation's borrowing of verbatim quotations merely "len[t] authenticity to this politically significant material . The copyright holders of "A Time to Heal" complied with the relevant statutory notice and registration Page 471 U.. 566 F. Inc. for example. 464 U. But we believe the Second Circuit gave insufficient deference to the scheme established by the Copyright Act for Page 471 U. Among these is § 107. at 464 U. v. and began with a contract giving the author's copyright to the publishers in exchange for their services in producing and marketing the work. S. of America v. The Court of Appeals was especially influenced by the "politically significant" nature of the subject matter and its conviction that it is not "the purpose of the Copyright Act to impede that harvest of knowledge so necessary to a democratic state" or "chill the activities of the press by forbidding a circumscribed use of copyrighted words." Sony Corp. and not to impede. S. Aiken. these rights -. the author commonly sells his rights to publishers who offer royalties in exchange for their services in producing and marketing the author's work. at 206. v. This principle applies equally to works of fiction and nonfiction. Mr. §§ 107-118. S. It is evident that the monopoly granted by copyright actively served its intended purpose of inducing the creation of new material of potential historical value. 547. was two years in the making. In preparing the book. at 197. Ford drafted essays and word portraits of public figures and participated in hundreds of taped interviews that were later distilled to chronicle his personal viewpoint." 723 F. 477 (dissenting opinion). 464 U. § 106. 209.and pardon. Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. In practice.. . Twentieth Century Music Corp." Id. the harvest of knowledge. S. 156 (1975). no author may copyright facts or ideas. The copyright owner's rights. are subject to certain statutory exceptions.g. 58 (1884) (originator of a photograph may claim copyright in his work). S. The book at issue here. S. and of Nixon's character. even a compilation of pure fact.250-word piece. S. The rights conferred by copyright are designed to assure contributors to the store of knowledge a fair return for their labors. cf." Id. [Footnote 2] In addition. See. copy. 111 U. 429(1984). II We agree with the Court of Appeals that copyright is intended to increase. 422 U. S. complementing the reporting of the facts.termed "expression" -. 548 . 111 U. constitute the major portion of this material. 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. Universal City Studios.
. 86th Cong.05. of America v. even stripped to the verbatim quotes conceded by The Nation to be copyrightable expression. 66 (1976) (hereinafter House Report). Fair Use of Copyrighted Works (1958)." as a whole.Rep. for Cert. p. S.Compare Wainwright Securities Inc. Section 107 requires a case-by-case determination whether a particular use is fair. an important marketable subsidiary right. In other words. was protected by § 106 from unauthorized reproduction. Nor do respondents dispute that verbatim copying of excerpts of the manuscript's original form of expression would constitute infringement unless excused as fair use.11[B]. if he thus cites the most important parts of the work.11[D]. The statutory formulation of the defense of fair use in the Copyright Act reflects the intent of Congress to codify the common law doctrine. Law of Copyright and Literary Property 260 (1944) (hereinafter Ball). Thus there is no dispute that the unpublished manuscript of "A Time to Heal. S. On the other hand. Especially in the realm of factual narrative. Ford's unpublished manuscript to lend authenticity to its account of the forthcoming memoirs. 401.. was not a fair use within the meaning of the Copyright Act. .. We need not reach these issues. with a . see Sony Corp. S. however. in a study of the doctrine of fair use commissioned by Congress for the revision effort. n. George Washington.. narrow.g. Ibid. See. and thus . p. 1416.2165. since a prohibition of such use would inhibit subsequent writers from attempting to improve upon prior works. 618 F. frustrate the very ends sought to be attained.. 558 F. 2d Sess. 9 (dissenting opinion).S. or enlarge it in any way. e. See 1 M. "[T]he author's consent to a reasonable use of his copyrighted works ha[d] always been implied by the courts as a necessary incident of the constitutional policy of promoting the progress of science and the useful arts. if his design be really and truly to use the passages for the purposes of fair and reasonable criticism. 94-1476. 2-159 (1984) (hereinafter Nimmer). Latman. at 2-164 . Yet copyright does not prevent subsequent users from copying from a prior author's work those constituent elements that are not original -. to Pet. "[A] reviewer may fairly cite largely from the original work. Inc. 1 Nimmer § 2. App. reprinted as Study No. 408. summarized prior law as turning on the "importance Page 471 U. Inc. See §§ 106. This approach was "intended to restate the [preexisting] judicial doctrine of fair use. Copyright § 2. Nimmer. C-20. Perhaps the controversy between the lower courts in this case over copyrightability is more aptly styled a dispute over whether The Nation's appropriation of unoriginal and uncopyrightable elements encroached on the originality embodied in the work as a whole. 14 in Copyright Law Revision Studies Nos. 7 (1960) (hereinafter Latman). Ball. 3 Nimmer § 13. structuring of material and marshaling of facts). A.2d 91 (CA2 1977) (protection accorded author's analysis. the law is currently unsettled regarding the ways in which uncopyrightable elements combine with the author's original contributions to form protected expression. Professor Latman." H. quotations borrowed under the rubric of fair use from other copyrighted works. Justice Story gave judicial recognition to the doctrine in a case that concerned the letters of another former President. . not to change." H. it is as clear that. The Nation effectively arrogated to itself the right of first publication. prepared for the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. 464 U.2d 972 (CA2 1980) (limiting protection to ordering and choice of words). Universal City Studios. For the reasons set forth below. Universal City Studios. with Hoehling v. at 464 U. No. [Footnote 3] As early as 1841. facts..R. or materials in the public domain -.. III A Fair use was traditionally defined as "a privilege in others than the owner of the copyright to use the copyrighted material in a reasonable manner without his consent. 549 verbatim excerpts of Mr. Wall Street Transcript Corp. and the statute notes four nonexclusive factors to be considered. would the reasonable copyright owner have consented to the use?" Latman 15. as The Nation has admitted to lifting verbatim quotes of the author's original language totaling between 300 and 400 words and constituting some 13% of The Nation article.for example.procedures. we find that this use of the copyrighted manuscript. v. 550 of the material copied or performed from the point of view of the reasonable copyright owner. In using generous Page 471 U. 462-463." Ball 260.as long as such use does not unfairly appropriate the author's original contributions.
2 Nimmer § 8. Inc. . It also recognized for the first time a distinct statutory right of first publication. at 464 U. 462463. at 13-62. The Copyright Act does not support this proposition. extending statutory protection to all works from the time of their creation. Because the potential damage to the author from judicially enforced "sharing" of the first publication right with unauthorized users of his manuscript is substantial. was tempered in practice by the equitable nature of the fair use doctrine. 94-473. Werckmeister. v. 88th Cong. Universal City Studios. n. however. 284.05[A]. at 65. of America v. Copyright Law. 552 Respondents contend. Under this provision. ." House Report at 129.207 U. No. Among its other innovations. and substitute the review for it. S. 469 U. such a use will be deemed in law a piracy. of his work. 1st Sess. 87th Cong. 469 U.05. Id.S. Copyright Law. 9 F. Though the right of first publication. . [Footnote 4] Under common law copyright. Accord. . n. Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U. S. Sony Corp. [Footnote 5] Page 471 U. . S. which had previously been an element of the common law protections afforded unpublished works. S." Folsom v. 342. But it has never been seriously disputed that "the fact that the plaintiff's work is unpublished . Marsh. 299 (1907). 1st Sess.. 3 Nimmer § 13. S.. S. fair use traditionally was not recognized as a defense to charges Page 471 U. Print 1961). like the other rights enumerated in § 106.23.. S. See Copyright Law Revision -. Inc. a factor not present in fair use of published works. in including first publication among the rights enumerated in § 106.Cas. the balance of equities in evaluating such a claim of fair use inevitably shifts. factors such as implied consent through de facto publication on performance or dissemination of a work may tip the balance of equities in favor of prepublication use. 207 U." Id. is expressly made subject to the fair use provision of § 107. ..S. "the property of the author . S. as the contract with Time illustrates.R. . 159-160 (1985). 9 (dissenting opinion). The Copyright Act represents the culmination of a major legislative reexamination of copyright doctrine. Perhaps because the fair use doctrine was predicated on the author's implied consent to "reasonable and customary" use when he released his work for public consumption. Comm.view not to criticise." Ibid.Part 2: Discussion and Comments on Report of the Register of Copyrights on General Revision of the U. that Congress. Publication of an author's expression before he has authorized its dissemination seriously infringes the author's right to decide when and whether it will be made public. 551 of copying from an author's as yet unpublished works. 464 U. From the beginning. is a factor tending to negate the defense of fair use. 41 (Comm. establishes the exclusive right of publications.) As Justice Story's hypothetical illustrates. . The right of first publication implicates a threshold decision by the author whether and in what form to release his work. which are expressly subject to fair use under § 107. 344-345 (No. 65 (1975) (hereinafter Senate Report). Snyder. fair use analysis must always be tailored to the individual case. the copyright owner would have the right to control the first public distribution of an authorized copy .S. 553 nature of the interest at stake is highly relevant to whether a given use is fair. In a given case. First publication is inherently different from other § 106 rights in that only one person can be the first publisher. 27 (H. Print 1963) (discussion suggesting works disseminated to the public in a form not constituting a technical "publication" should nevertheless be subject to fair use). p. . intended that fair use would apply in pari materia to published and unpublished works. 2. S. .Rep.. at 8-273. The Report of the House Committee on the Judiciary confirms that "Clause (3) of section 106. 153. The Page 471 U.901) (CC Mass. 4. v." American Tobacco Co. however. it eliminated publication "as a dividing line between common law and statutory protection. but to supersede the use of the original work." Ibid. This absolute rule. 3 Nimmer § 13. at 62. the commercial value of the right lies primarily in exclusivity. the fair use doctrine has always precluded a use that "supersede[s] the use of the original. in his intellectual creation [was] absolute until he voluntarily part[ed] with the same. those entrusted with the task of revision recognized the "overbalancing reasons to preserve the common law protection of undisseminated works until the author or his successor chooses to disclose them. See Mills Music." Copyright Law Revision.
which are valuable in themselves and serve as a valuable adjunct to publicity and marketing. We find unconvincing respondents' contention that the absence of the quoted passage from the House Report indicates an intent to abandon the traditional distinction between fair use of published and unpublished works. narrow.L.The Senate Report confirms that Congress intended the unpublished nature of the work to figure prominently in fair use analysis. Marks. This argument assumes that the unpublished nature of copyrighted material is only relevant to letters or other confidential writings not intended for dissemination. 2. The obvious benefit to author and public alike of assuring authors the leisure to develop their ideas free from fear of expropriation outweighs any short-term "news value" to be gained from premature publication of the author's expression. and not to "change." Id. If the work is 'out of print' and unavailable for purchase through normal channels. or enlarge it. at 66. though not necessarily determinative. S."Id. Under ordinary circumstances. It appears instead that the fair use discussion of photocopying of classroom materials was omitted from the final Report because educators and publishers in the interim had negotiated a set of guidelines that rendered the discussion obsolete. Although the Committee selected photocopying of classroom materials to illustrate fair use. The thrust of the decision below is that "[t]he scope of [fair use] is undoubtedly wider when the information Page 471 U. however. See generally Comment. See Belshi v. See 3 Nimmer § 13. the copyright owner's 'right of first publication' would outweigh any needs of reproduction for classroom purposes. Copyright and the First Amendment. S. . B Respondents. 597 (1984). . Grannis ed." Ibid. It is true that common law copyright was often enlisted in the service of personal privacy. 983. at 65. The House Report nevertheless incorporates the discussion by reference. at 13-62. and considers it still has value as an analysis of various aspects of the [fair use] problem. 598 F. In its commercial guise. Even if the legislative history were entirely silent. Under ordinary circumstances.1967) (exploitation of subsidiary rights is necessary to financial success of new books). though not necessarily determinative. The Fair Use Privilege in Copyright Law 125 (1985) (hereinafter Patry)." Senate Report at 64. See Goldstein. 554 general standards of fair use are applicable to all kinds of uses of copyrighted material. John's L. 58 St. Page 471 U. the author's right to control the first public appearance of his undisseminated expression will outweigh a claim of fair use. The applicability of the fair use doctrine to unpublished works is narrowly limited. in What Happens in Book Publishing 230 (C. we would be bound to conclude from Congress' characterization of § 107 as a "restatement" that its effect was to preserve existing law concerning fair use of unpublished works as of other types of protected works. Woodward. its preparation. S. factor in fair use is whether or not the work is available to the potential user. House Report at 62. In discussing fair use of photocopied materials in the classroom the Committee Report states: "A key. this is the result of a deliberate choice on the part of the copyright owner. factor" tending to negate a defense of fair use. an author's right to choose when he will publish is no less deserving of protection. Subsidiary Rights and Permissions. citing to the Senate Report and stating: "The Committee has reviewed this discussion. The author's control of first public distribution implicates not only his personal interest in creative control.Rev. it emphasized that "the same Page 471 U.Supp. and its grooming for public dissemination is a crucial one for any literary endeavor. The Stage of Publication as a "Fair Use" Factor: Harper & Row. the user may have more justification for reproducing it. although the work is unavailable. House Report at 67. echos the common law's concern that the author or copyright owner retain control throughout this critical stage. 556 . W.Rev. We conclude that the unpublished nature of a work is "[a] key. 1004-1006 (1970) (The absolute protection the common law accorded to soon-to-be published works "[was] justified by [its] brevity and expedience"). since. 70 Colum. which accords the copyright owner the "right to control the first public distribution" of his work.193.05. 36 (DC 1984) (successful marketing depends on coordination of serialization and release to public). See Brandeis & Warren. n. We also find unpersuasive respondents' argument that fair use may be made of a soon-to-be-published manuscript on the ground that the author has demonstrated he has no interest in nonpublication.L. The Copyright Act. . Senate Report at 64. but his property interest in exploitation of prepublication rights. contend that First Amendment values require a different rule under the circumstances of this case.Rev. Publishers v. Nation Enterprises. however. 198-199 (1890). 555 The period encompassing the work's initiation. The Right to Privacy. 4 Harv. Patry.
e.S. Quinto v. No author may copyright his ideas or the facts he narrates..2d 57.. Inc.the information respecting current events contained in the literary production -. Inc. 215. however. Stein. 209 (1954): . J.. This Court stated in Mazer v..10[B][2]. 554 (DC 1981) (same)." Consumers Union of the United States. 503 F. and not the ideas expressed). S.Supp. that copyright's idea/ expression dichotomy "strike[s] a definitional balance between the First Amendment and the Copyright Act by permitting free communication of facts while still protecting an author's expression. S.506 F. See. aff'd. The Second Circuit noted.the piracy of verbatim quotations for the purpose of "scooping" the authorized first serialization. As this Court long ago observed: "[T]he news element -. 558 no need to 'bodily appropriate' [Mr. 1137 (SDNY 1980) ("newsworthiness" of material copied does not justify copying). S.Supp. S. 1014 (1978). 433 U.. (1971) (BRENNAN. 1050 (CA2 1983) (construing 723 F. Ford's memoirs. Respondents' theory. [Footnote 6] Where an author and publisher have invested extensive resources in creating an original work and are poised to release it to the public.2d 91 (CA2 1977). Associated Press. would expand fair use to effectively destroy any expectation of copyright protection in the work of a public figure. there would be little incentive to create or profit in financing such memoirs. S. United States. Inc. See Wainwright Securities Inc. S. The public interest in the free flow of information is assured by the law's refusal to recognize a valid copyright in facts.2d 195 (1983) (case below) as allowing advertiser to quote Consumer Reports). Cf. 575 (1977)." Brief for Respondents 38-39. Zacchini v. Wall Street Transcript Corp. General Signal Corp. Accord. correctly. American Broadcasting Cos. copyright supplies the economic incentive to create and disseminate ideas. v. 61 (1980) (citations omitted). it is the history of the day. cert. 562. no legitimate aim is served by preempting the right of first publication. But copyright assures those who write and publish factual narratives such as "A Time to Heal" that Page 471 U. 17 U. cert. 347 U. 557 they may at least enjoy the right to market the original expression contained therein as just compensation for their investment. but it can claim Page 471 U. 1 Nimmer § 1. The fact that the words the author has chosen to clothe his narrative may of themselves be "newsworthy" is not an independent justification for unauthorized copying of the author's expression prior to publication.g." 723 F. not only the facts contained in Mr. but is a report of matters that ordinarily are publici juris. Inc. Columbia Broadcasting System. 248 U.S. By establishing a marketable right to the use of one's expression. denied.S.621 F. New York Times Co. 469 U. § 102(b).434 U. v. 403 U." International News Service v. and the public would be denied an important source of significant historical information. 433 U. it should not be forgotten that the Framers intended copyright itself to be the engine of free expression. 234 (1918). Ford's expression as essential to reporting the news story it claims the book itself represents. concurring) (Copyright laws are not restrictions on freedom of speech. but "the precise manner in which [he] expressed himself [were] as newsworthy as what he had to say.2d 1044. 823 (1984). 201. Absent such protection." Iowa State University Research Foundation. Roy Export Co. S.. as copyright protects only form of expression. Respondents advance the substantial public import of the subject matter of the Ford memoirs as grounds for excusing a use that would ordinarily not pass muster as a fair use -. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co. In our haste to disseminate news. 672 F.is not the creation of the writer.2d at 203. 558 F. S. denied.C. 724 F.. n. Ford's] 'expression' of that information by utilizing portions of the actual [manuscript]. Respondents explain their copying of Mr. cert. empowering a court to ignore a copyright whenever it determines the underlying work contains material of possible public importance. denied. Establishment v. Nor do respondents assert any actual necessity for circumventing the copyright scheme with respect to the types of works and users at issue here. 713.S. The fair use doctrine is not a license for corporate theft. The promise of copyright would be an empty one if it could be avoided merely by dubbing the infringement a fair use "news report" of the book. 248 U. v. 459 U. S.conveyed relates to matters of high public concern. To paraphrase another recent Second Circuit decision: "[Respondent] possessed an unfettered right to use any factual information revealed in [the memoirs] for the purpose of enlightening its audience. v. 826 (1982). 726.. Legal Times of Washington. Respondents argue that the public's interest in learning this news as fast as possible outweighs the right of the author to control its first publication.2d 1095 (CA2). In respondents' view. Inc. 403 U..
1495.. We do not suggest this right not to speak would sanction abuse of the copyright owner's monopoly as an instrument to suppress facts. n. Where Lies the Public Interest?. one which serves the same ultimate end as freedom of speech in its affirmative aspect. There is necessarily. 82 Colum. a concomitant freedom not to speak publicly. Patry 140-142. 8 (CA11 1984). But the ultimate aim is. Page 471 U. Page 471 U. 23 N. 560 Courts and commentators have recognized that copyright. and the right of first publication in particular. v.). . Foley.2d 250. Pacific & Southern Co. at 1-70. 948 (1982). cert.Rev." Gordon. n. See Schnapper v. to stimulate [the creation of useful works] for the general public good. But in the words of New York's Chief Judge Fuld: "The essential thrust of the First Amendment is to prohibit improper restraints on the voluntary public expression of ideas. 19 ASCAP Copyright Law Symposium 43. v. Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the BetamaxCase and its Predecessors. and within suitably defined areas.Y. freedom of thought and expression "includes both the right to speak freely and the right to refrain from speaking at all. 559 It is fundamentally at odds with the scheme of copyright to accord lesser rights in those works that are of greatest importance to the public. it shields the man who wants to speak or publish when others wish him to be quiet. In view of the First Amendment protections already embodied in the Copyright Act's distinction between copyrightable expression and uncopyrightable facts and ideas.J. . Maynard. 135 (1984). IV Fair use is a mixed question of law and fact. Random House. Aiken: "The immediate effect of our copyright law is to secure a fair return for an 'author's' creative labor." Wooley v.L.S. Duncan." Sobel. 744 F.2d 1490. 667 F. 156. Such a notion ignores the major premise of copyright. 348. . an appellate court "need not remand for further factfinding .D. at 422 U." 422 U. 78 (1971). 705." . 215 U. and the latitude for scholarship and comment traditionally afforded by fair use. outweighs any detriment to the artist' would be to propose depriving copyright owners of their right in the property precisely when they encounter those users who could afford to pay for it. Copyright and the First Amendment. 455 U.2d 341. See generally Comment.'" And again in Twentieth Century Music Corp. S. Copyright and the First Amendment: A Gathering Storm?. . S. 59. S. serve this countervailing First Amendment value.S. ."The economic philosophy behind the clause empowering Congress to grant patents and copyrights is the conviction that encouragement of individual effort by personal gain is the best way to advance public welfare through the talents of authors and inventors in 'science and useful Arts. Whether verbatim copying from a public figure's manuscript in a given case is or is not fair must be judged according to the traditional equities of fair use. 255 (1968).2d 102 (1981). Moreover. and injures author and public alike. . [but] may conclude as a matter of law that [the challenged use] do[es] not qualify as a fair use of the copyrighted work. 430 U. by this incentive. C. 244 N. 1 Nimmer § 1. the public [soon] would have nothing worth reading. 24. 714 (1977) (BURGER. 1615 (1982). 1600. Inc. .App.10[B]. S. S. And as one commentator has noted: "If every volume that was in the public interest could be pirated away by a competing publisher.E. 59 Tulane L. .Rev. "[T]o propose that fair use be imposed whenever the 'social value [of dissemination] .C.S. we see no warrant for expanding the doctrine of fair use to create what amounts to a public figure exception to copyright. 430 U. denied. Where the district court has found facts sufficient to evaluate each of the statutory factors." Estate of Hemingway v.
S. 83. Cf. In arguing that the purpose of news reporting is not purely commercial. of America v. we cannot ignore The Nation's stated purpose of scooping the forthcoming hardcover and Time abstracts.05[A][1]. is a separate factor that tends to weigh against a finding of fair use. We agree with the Second Circuit that the trial court erred in fixing on whether the information contained in the memoirs was actually new to the public. Inc.Id. Gertz v. 90th Cong. News reporting is one of the examples enumerated in § 107 to "give some idea of the sort of activities the courts might regard as fair use under the circumstances. making a "news event" out of its unauthorized first publication of a noted figure's copyrighted expression. quoting Page 471 U." Senate Report at 62. to Pet. Publishers. of supplanting the copyright holder's commercially valuable right of first publication. 37 (1967).Supp. 686. The factors enumerated in the section are not meant to be exclusive: "[S]ince the doctrine is an equitable rule of reason.2d at 215 (dissenting). This listing was not intended to be exhaustive..Rep. aff'd. The drafters resisted pressures from special interest groups to create presumptive categories of fair use.'" Time Inc. S. "[E]very commercial use of copyrighted material is presumptively an unfair exploitation of the monopoly privilege that belongs to the owner of the copyright." Sony Corp. But The Nation went beyond simply reporting uncopyrightable information and actively sought to exploit the headline value of its infringement. Robert Welch. at 13-72. 130. As Judge Meskill wisely noted." House Report at 65. at 13-71.. Patry 477. Establishment v.R. Harper & Row. The Nation's use had not merely the incidental effect. Inc. v. 563 . 323. 25. The four factors identified by Congress as especially relevant in determining whether the use was fair are: (1) the purpose and character of the use." Senate Report at 61. 451. n. We address each one separately. Inc. as opposed to nonprofit." 3 Nimmer § 13.05[A].Supp.. See Roy Export Co. (2) the nature of the copyrighted work. [Footnote 7] App.Supp. at 1144. No. Columbia Broadcasting System. The Nation has every right to seek to be the first to publish information.. but the intended purpose. 418 U.. 345-346 (1974). 500 F. Universal City Studios. The fact that an article arguably is "news. 3 Nimmer § 13. 146 (SDNY 1968). Thus whether The Nation article constitutes fair use under § 107 must be reviewed in light of the principles discussed above. at 1495. C-27.2d 1221 (CA2 1974). S. "The issue is not what constitutes 'news. The crux of the profit/nonprofit distinction is not whether the sole motive of the use is monetary gain.' but whether a claim of newsreporting is a valid fair use defense to an infringement of copyrightable expression. In evaluating character and purpose. 418 U. 690 (SDNY) (purpose of text was to compete with original). or to single out any particular use as presumptively a "fair" use. Also relevant to the "character" of the use is "the propriety of the defendant's conduct. including those mentioned in the second sentence. Inc. but structured the provision as an affirmative defense requiring a case-by-case analysis. see ibid." Patry 119. S. Bernard Geis Associates. The Second Circuit correctly identified news reporting as the general purpose of The Nation's use. The Nation misses the point entirely. 562 The fact that a publication was commercial. "Fair use presupposes good faith' and `fair dealing. no generally applicable definition is possible. S. 378 F.. at 464 U." and therefore a productive use.S. for Cert. § 101 (definition of "including" and "such as"). and each case raising the question must be decided on its own facts. Page 471 U. but whether the user stands to profit from exploitation of the copyrighted material without paying the customary price. 293 F. "[W]hether a use referred to in the first sentence of section 107 is a fair use in a particular case will depend upon the application of the determinative factors. (4) the effect on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. n. 503 F. 1st Sess.3. v. 4. S. is simply one factor in a fair use analysis.. 464 U. Purpose of the Use. See H. See Meredith Corp. "[c]ourts should be chary of deciding what is and what is not news. (3) the substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as Page 471 U. 561 a whole." 723 F.
the Act directs us to examine the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole. John's L. 1 Nimmer § 1. it was free to bid for the right of abstracting excerpts from "A Time to Heal. he quoted these passages precisely because they qualitatively embodied Ford's distinctive expression. While even substantial quotations might qualify as fair use in a review of a published work or a news account of a speech that had been delivered to the public or disseminated to the press. exceeds that necessary to disseminate the facts." App. see House Report at 65. 81 F. Conversely. 561 (1982). pt. The Nation's clandestine publication afforded no such opportunity for creative or quality control. It was hastily patched together. Some of the briefer quotes from the memoirs are arguably necessary adequately to convey the facts.Supp. p. 303. Id. One may move from sparsely embellished maps and directories to elegantly written biography.S. 1706 (1966) (statement of John Schulman). The extent to which one must permit expressive language to be copied.'" Wainwright Securities Inc. In the case of Mr. 669 (1936). Mr.2d 49. "[E]ven within the field of fact works. there are gradations as to the relative proportion of fact and fancy. The Nation cannot offer up even the fiction of consent as justification. Cf.." 557 F. a taking may not be excused merely because it is insubstantial with respect to the infringing work. at 1072.05[A]. the copyright holders' interest in confidentiality is irrefutable. See. at 1145 (taking of 55 seconds out of 1 hour and 29-minute film deemed qualitatively substantial). As the statutory language indicates. the words actually quoted were an insubstantial portion of "A Time to Heal. S. e. "no plagiarist can excuse the wrong by showing how much of his work he did not pirate." Sheldon v. "A Time to Heal" may be characterized as an unpublished historical narrative or autobiography.. The trial court found that The Nation knowingly exploited a purloined manuscript. the author's right to control the first public appearance of his expression weighs against such use of the work before its release. 8. but also the choices of when. the . Next. will thus vary from case to case. the Act directs attention to the nature of the copyrighted work. n. 565 essentially the heart of the book. at 613. But The Nation did not stop at isolated phrases." Fair use "distinguishes between `a true scholar and a chiseler who infringes a work for personal profit. B-1... Nature of the Copyrighted Work. Establishment v. S. C-28 . A Time editor described the chapters on the pardon as "the most interesting and moving parts of the entire manuscript. Navasky as among the most powerful passages in those chapters." App.C-21. or carry the "definitive quality" of the original. 564 use. Such Page 471 U. in order to assure dissemination of the underlying facts. We believe the Court of Appeals erred in overruling the District Judge's evaluation of the qualitative nature of the taking. The fact that a work is unpublished is a critical element of its "nature. v. denied. 58 St.Rev. where.Rev. Columbia Broadcasting System. 56 (CA2). The portions actually quoted were selected by Mr. C-20 . A use that so clearly infringes the copyright holder's interests in confidentiality and creative control is difficult to characterize as "fair. Inc. Like its competitor newsweekly. at 563. Ford's manuscript. In short.Supp. 53 Iowa L. or show that "this comes from President Ford.. and in what form first to publish a work. for example." Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used. at C-18. at 306. for Cert. See Gorman. In absolute terms. and contained "a number of inaccuracies." The District Court. quoting from Hearings on Bills for the General Revision of the Copyright Law before the House Committee on the Judiciary." App. id. Fair Use and the Revision of the Copyright Act. the copyright holders had entered into a contractual undertaking to "keep the manuscript confidential" and required that all those to whom the manuscript was shown also "sign an agreement to keep the manuscript confidential." id. at 305. 8. Ford's characterization of the White House tapes as the "smoking gun" is perhaps so integral to the idea expressed as to be inseparable from it. As Judge Learned Hand cogently remarked.558 F. Unlike the typical claim of fair use. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp. 3.2d at 94. ser. however." 3 Nimmer § 13. 1C-20. found that "[T]he Nation took what was Page 471 U. to Pet. While the copyright holders' contract with Time required Time to submit its proposed article seven days before publication..Copyright Soc.C-29. cert. 89th Cong. Our prior discussion establishes that the scope of fair use is narrower with respect to unpublished works.g. 560. and instead excerpted subjective descriptions and portraits of public figures whose power lies in the author's individualized expression. Second. 298 U.Schulman. Wall Street Transcript Corp. 300b-300c (testimony of Victor Navasky). App. Fact or Fancy? The Implications for Copyright. Comment. 832 (1968). 503 F. for Cert. The law generally recognizes a greater need to disseminate factual works than works of fiction or fantasy." Reply Brief for Petitioners 16." Id. Roy Export Co.10[C]. to Pet. focusing on the most expressive elements of the work. He testified that he used verbatim excerpts because simply reciting the information could not adequately convey the "absolute certainty with which [Ford] expressed himself. 1st Sess. 29 J. The right of first publication encompasses not only the choice whether to publish at all.
at464 U. at 1070. 15 (CA2 1981). [Footnote 9] See 3 Nimmer § 13. S." 723 F. The Court of Appeals rejected this factfinding as clearly erroneous. Time cited The Nation's article. S. 464 U." 3 Nimmer § 13.2d 1061. S. Universal City Studios. supra. v.05[A]. With respect to apportionment of profits flowing from a copyright infringement. is limited to copying by others which Page 471 U. Nizer. 36 (collecting cases) (dissenting opinion).precisely the use petitioners had licensed to Time. 570. Meeropol v. v. See 3 Nimmer § 14. Inc. and cases cited therein. and n.. The trial court properly awarded actual damages and accounting of profits. which contained verbatim quotes from the unpublished manuscript. Any publication of material from chapters 1 and 3 would permit Time to renegotiate its final payment. 560 F.02. besides the verbatim quotes at issue here.S. when properly applied. The Nation article is structured around the quoted excerpts which serve as its dramatic focal points. 568 Inc. Nizer. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp.S.. both to the originator and to the plagiarist who seeks to profit from marketing someone else's copyrighted expression. at 13-76. See Meeropol v. See Appendix to this opinion. S.500 were the direct effect of the infringement. This inquiry must take account not only of harm to the original. § 504(b). "Fair use. this Court has held that an infringer who commingles infringing and noninfringing elements "must abide the consequences. Columbia Broadcasting System. 1071 (CA2 1977) (copyrighted letters constituted less than 1% of infringing work but were prominently featured). 503 F.14-8. S. 567 does not materially impair the marketability of the work which is copied. 17 U. 309 U. Page 471 U.2d at 209.05[B]. one need only show that. 406 (1940). as a reason for its nonperformance. See 17 U. as opposed to the facts taken from the memoirs. Finally. amount of Ford's original language. Cf. Time's cancellation of its projected serialization and its refusal to pay the $12. it would adversely affect the potential market for the copyrighted work. 656 F. S.. Stripped to the verbatim quotes. S. at 1-87.2d 11. 309 U. was drawn exclusively from the chapters on the pardon. Rarely will a case of copyright infringement present such clear-cut evidence of actual damage. S. More important. The excerpts were employed as featured episodes in a story about the Nixon pardon -.as Navasky expressed it. Inc.C. In view of the expressive value of the excerpts and their key role in the infringing work.fact that a substantial portion of the infringing work was copied verbatim is evidence of the qualitative value of the copied material. Petitioners assured Time that there would be no other authorized publication of any portion of the unpublished manuscript prior to April 23. American Broadcasting Cos. Roy Export v. Ford's expression. but an actual.10[D]..13-78 (footnote omitted). indeed an infinitesimal. effect on the market. once a copyright holder establishes with reasonable probability the existence of a causal connection between the infringement and a loss of revenue. unless he can make a separation of the profits so as to assure to the injured party all that justly belongs to him. [Footnote 8] the direct takings from the unpublished manuscript constitute at least 13% of the infringing Page 471 U. It is undisputed that the factual material in the balance of The Nation's article. Inc. the burden properly shifts to the infringer to show that this damage would have occurred had there been no taking of copyrighted expression. 621 F. at 13-77 ." Sheldon v.. Similarly. We disagree. we cannot agree with the Second Circuit that the "magazine took a meager. post p. 471 U. Mastercraft Corp. to negate fair use. 1979.S. noting that the record did not establish a causal relation between Time's nonperformance and respondents' unauthorized publication of Mr.Supp.C. but also of harm to the market for derivative works. at 14-7 ." This last factor is undoubtedly the single most important element of fair use. See Stevens Linen Associates." Sony Corp. 566 article." 1 Nimmer § l. 390. at 464 U.1. 451 (emphasis added). Petitioners established a prima facie case of actual damage that respondents failed to rebut.2d 57 (CA2 1980). if the challenged use "should become widespread. Effect on the Market. See Iowa State University Research Foundation. id. at 1146. of America v. "If the defendant's work adversely affects the value of any of the rights in the copyrighted work (in this case the adaptation [and serialization] right) the use is not fair. The borrowing of these verbatim quotes from the unpublished manuscript lent The Nation's piece a special air of authenticity -. § 504(b) (the infringer is required to prove elements of profits attributable to other than the infringed work). The trial court found not merely a potential. 484. the Act focuses on "the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. the reader would know it was Ford .
and we see no warrant for judicially imposing. 570 [Footnote 1] Section 106 provides in pertinent part: "Subject to sections 107 through 118. comment. Because we find that The Nation's use of these verbatim excerpts from the unpublished manuscript was not a fair use. . Any copyright infringer may claim to benefit the public by increasing public access to the copyrighted work. in finding the taking "infinitesimal.speaking. . 300c. Page 471 U." [Footnote 2] Section 107 states: "Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106. news reporting. is not an infringement of copyright.2d at 1499-1500. It erred. and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. scholarship. Finally." "(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work. S. the traditional doctrine of fair use. does not sanction the use made by The Nation of these copyrighted materials. become in the aggregate a major inroad on copyright that must be prevented. V The Court of Appeals erred in concluding that The Nation's use of the copyrighted material was excused by the public's interest in the subject matter. "Isolated instances of minor infringements. It is so ordered." Ibid. ." Senate Report at 65. as well. S. . v. App. for purposes such as criticism." the Court of Appeals accorded too little weight to the qualitative importance of the quoted passages of original expression. or research. 569 Placed in a broader perspective. a "compulsory license" permitting unfettered access to the unpublished copyrighted expression of public figures. the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and authorize any of the following:" "(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies . . But Congress has not designed. . . a fair use doctrine that permits extensive prepublication quotations from an unreleased manuscript without the copyright owner's consent poses substantial potential for damage to the marketability of first serialization rights in general. . 744 F. the fair use of a copyrighted work . . In sum. as embodied in the Copyright Act. . Duncan. teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use). See Pacific & Southern Co. the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed. Page 471 U. The Senate Report states: "With certain special exceptions . and not The Nation. when multiplied many times." "(3) to distribute copies ." . . . of the copyrighted work to the public. a use that supplants any part of the normal market for a copyrighted work would ordinarily be considered an infringement. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include -. in overlooking the unpublished nature of the work and the resulting impact on the potential market for first serial rights of permitting unauthorized prepublication excerpts under the rubric of fair use. The Nation conceded that its verbatim copying of some 300 words of direct quotation from the Ford manuscript would constitute an infringement unless excused as a fair use. Thus it directly competed for a share of the market for prepublication excerpts.
Haig said. it could change. "that a President does have authority to grant a pardon even before criminal action has been taken against an individual. S. that the evidence would prove his innocence. S. Although the initial print order has not been decided. 562. 571 it. that Washington lawyer Edward Bennett Williams. Advance excerpts from the book will appear in Time in midApril and in The Reader's Digest thereafter. depending upon the public reaction to the serialization. Alexander Haig."(1) the purpose and character of the use. former President Gerald R. but he let Haig explain the President's alternatives. a Democrat. Ford says that the idea of giving a blanket pardon to Richard M. are identified in boldface in the text." "(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole.000." APPENDIX TO OPINION OF THE COURT The portions of The Nation article which were copied verbatim from "A Time to Heal. he basically agreed with Haig's assessment and adds. Nixon had repeatedly assured me that he was not involved in Watergate. 1974. that Nixon was the one who first proposed Rockefeller for Vice President. the subject was first broached to him by General Haig on August 1. He then listed the different ways Nixon might resign." Haig replied. including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes. He could "[bb]ride it out[eb]" [Footnote 2/4] or he could resign. and that he regretted his "[bb]cowardice[eb]" [Footnote 2/1] in allowing Rockefeller to remove himself from Vice Presidential contention. was his choice for head of the Central Intelligence Agency. S." excepting quotes from Government documents and quotes attributed by Ford to third persons. The Nation obtained the 655-page typescript before publication.[eb] [Footnote 2/3]" Ford had believed him. THE FORD MEMOIRS BEHIND THE NIXON PARDON In his memoirs.[eb]" [Footnote 2/6] "It's my understanding from a White House lawyer. the figure is tentatively set at 50. Nixon was raised before Nixon resigned from the Presidency by Gen. The corresponding passages in the Ford manuscript are footnoted. According to Ford's version. Ford was deeply hurt by Haig's revelation: "[bb]Over the past several months. would pardon him. 572 ." Page 471 U. I did ask Haig about the extent of a President's pardon power. and concluded by pointing out that [bb]Nixon could agree to leave in return for an agreement that the new President. but for a misunderstanding. Ford's account of the Nixon pardon contains significant new detail on the negotiations and considerations that surrounded Page 471 U. n. 7. General Haig revealed that the newly transcribed White House tapes were the equivalent of the "[bb]smoking gun[eb]" [Footnote 2/2] and that Ford should prepare himself to become President. who was then the White House chief of staff. that the matter would fade from view. which Harper & Row will publish in late May or early June. and" "(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work." "(2) the nature of the copyrighted work. "[bb]Because of his references to the pardon authority.[eb] [Footnote 2/5] Although Ford said it would be improper for him to make any recommendation. A Time To Heal. Ford. a week before Nixon resigned. See ante at 471 U. he might have selected Ronald Reagan as his 1976 running mate. Ford also writes that. Ford also describes his often prickly relations with Henry Kissinger.
574 Buchen wanted to condition the pardon on Nixon. however. a plan was considered whereby the Presidential materials would be kept in a vault at a Federal facility near San Clemente. whether Jerry Ford pardons him or not. luncheon audience later in the day that [bb]the President was not guilty of an impeachable offense."[eb] [Footnote 2/15] The statement they really wanted was never forthcoming. Ford goes out of his way to assure the reader that [bb]"compassion for Nixon as an individual[eb] Page 471 U. Clair." Zeigler ."[eb] [Footnote 2/8] In justifying the pardon. express true contrition.e. his press aide. Henry S. [bb]"His few meetings with his client had shown him that the former President's ability to discuss Watergate objectively was almost nonexistent."[eb] [Footnote 2/10] The precipitating factor in his decision was a series of secret meetings his general counsel." He went on to say: "One can make a strong argument for leniency. S. who had served six Presidents and who agreed that [bb]the mere mention of a pardon "could cause a lot of trouble." and with Bryce Harlow. Haig and Henry Kissinger agreed with him. Page 471 U."[eb] [Footnote 2/9] Rather. where they were both staying at the time. Nixon's former press secretary. "Silence implies assent.s agreeing to settle the question of who would retain custody and control over the tapes and Presidential papers that might be relevant to various Watergate proceedings. held with Watergate Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworski in the Jefferson Hotel. over the wording of Nixon's statement.i. Ford attributes Jaworski with providing some [bb]"crucial" information"[eb] [Footnote 2/11] -.But because Ford had neglected to tell Haig he thought the idea of a resignation conditioned on a pardon was improper. At one point. "President Nixon is not issuing any statement whatsoever regarding Watergate. Bob Hartmann.. Ford tells of the negotiation with Jack Miller.. "Lets get one thing straight immediately. Nixon was not likely to yield. One would be retained by the General Services Administration. Ruth had written: "If you decide to recommend indictment I think it is fair and proper to notify Jack Miller and the White House sufficiently in advance so that pardon action could be taken before the indictment. as being especially persuasive.. Vice President Ford called Haig and read him a written statement: "I want you to understand that I have no intention of recommending what the President should do about resigning or not resigning and that nothing we talked about yesterday afternoon should be given any consideration in whatever decision the President may wish to make."[eb] [Footnote 2/13] and [bb]"it would be virtually impossible for me to direct public attention on anything else. Hartmann was not so sure. [bb]"the whole house of cards might have collapsed. but Ford was reluctant to do that. Mich. I think he ought to do it early. Nixon's lawyer. that Nixon was under investigation in ten separate areas.[eb]" [Footnote 2/7] As a result of these various conversations. 573 [bb]hadn't prompted my decision at all. who felt that the mention of a pardon in this context was a "time bomb. S." Ford then consulted with White House special counsel James St. and if President Ford is so inclined. want Nixon to make a full confession on the occasion of his pardon or. Ford told a Jackson. that [bb]Nixon "would not spend time quietly in San Clemente. Phil Buchen. But as Ford reports Miller's response. at a minimum. the other by Richard Nixon." Despite what Haig had told him about the "smoking gun" tapes."[eb] [Footnote 2/14] Buchen." Ford decided that court proceedings against Nixon might take six years."[eb] [Footnote 2/12] Ford cites a memorandum from Jaworski's assistant. and that [bb]the court process could "take years." Zeigler said. he was confronted with an ultimatum by Ron Zeigler. suggested that Haig might well have returned to the White House and told President Nixon that he had mentioned the idea and Ford seemed comfortable with it. The White House did. Ruth Jr. rather than late. "Had I said otherwise at that moment. but the vault would require two keys to open it. he did it because he had [bb]"to get the monkey off my back one way or the other. As soon as Ford's emissary arrived in San Clemente."[eb] he writes. who had no advice one way or the other on the matter more than pointing out that he was not the lawyer who had given Haig the opinion on the pardon. Ford also discussed the matter with Jack Marsh.
proposed a draft." Ultimately."[eb] [Footnote 2/20] "Sir. Kissinger talked him out of it." [bb]"We'll get along."[eb] [Footnote 2/18] Ford went: [bb]He was stretched out flat on his back." ." Page 471 U. I'll do every thing I can to work with you. when Ford learned that Nixon's phlebitis had acted up and his health was seriously impaired. Shortly thereafter. [bb]"If I made the trip. 576 On Kissinger."[eb] Ford said. It would be disastrous from a foreign policy point of view. he debated whether to pay the ailing former President a visit. which was turned down on the ground that [bb]"no statement would be better than that. Ford returned to the Executive Office Building and phoned Henry Kissinger to let him know how he felt. When Ford aide Benton Becker tried to explain to Nixon that acceptance of a pardon was an admission of guilt. 1977. And when Becker left. 575 felt the President wasn't really listening. people would say I lacked compassion. Ford sums up the philosophy underlying his decision as one he picked up as a student at Yale Law School many years before. [bb]"I need you. and I wouldn't be able to implement your foreign policy. S. he reports. and not yours to get along with me. "He'd be excellent. which he said Ford could call upon at will if he felt he needed it to quiet dissent from conservatives who objected to Kissinger's role in the firing of Schlesinger. Ford says he had "no problem with that. foreign governments would know that they were dealing with a lame-duck President. S." observed Nixon. he told the President he had [bb]"no ambition to hold office after January. he tells us.behind us as quickly as possible. "You can't do that. Page 471 U. You've got to be an affirmative President. 'it is my job to get along with you. Kissinger presented him with a "draft" letter of resignation."[eb] he said."[eb] [Footnote 2/22] Nixon replied that that was good. His face was ashen. and wires led from his arms. public policy demanded that I put Nixon -. and I thought I had never seen anyone closer to death. Ford was."[eb] Referring to Kissinger's joint jobs as Secretary of State and National Security Adviser to the President. 577 On the Decision to Run Again. since his own choice for his running mate in 1976 was John Connally. [bb]"Henry. [bb]"I learned that public policy often took precedence over a rule of law. which stopped far short of a full confession. Nixon pressed on him some cuff links and a tiepin "out of my own jewelry box.and Watergate -. I want you to stay. Nixon wanted to talk about the Washington Redskins. [bb]"I don't want to make any change. he Page 471 U. Instead. When Ford was informed that Nixon wanted him to replace Agnew. chest and legs to machines with orange lights that blinked on and off. S. I think it's worked out well. so sincere in his intention not to run again that he thought he would announce it and enhance his credibility in the country and the Congress. as well as keep the promise he had made to his wife. The country needs you. It would probably have the same consequences in dealing with the Congress on domestic issues. All our initiatives would be dead in the water."[eb] [Footnote 2/16] They went through three more drafts before they agreed on the statement Nixon finally made. Betty."[eb] [Footnote 2/21] Later. Immediately after being informed by Nixon of his intention to resign. Although I respected the tenet that no man should be above the law. Ford did make the change and relieved Kissinger of his responsibilities as National Security Adviser at the same time that he fired James Schlesinger as Secretary of Defense. For the next two and a half years. On John Connally. You can't reassert the authority of the Presidency if you leave yourself hanging out on a dead limb.' Kissinger replied."[eb] [Footnote 2/17] Later. so let's keep it that way. If I didn't. it would remind everybody of Watergate and the pardon. Ford said. There were tubes in his nose and mouth.[eb] [Footnote 2/19] The manuscript made available to The Nation includes many references to Henry Kissinger and other personalities who played a major role during the Ford years. [bb]"I know we'll get along.
Haldeman's memoir. who had been taking pictures for the last hour. 580 . "Has anyone considered. [bb]"Massive airstrikes would constitute overkill.)"[eb] [Footnote 2/24] Nixon felt disdain for the Democratic leadership of the House. [bb]Nixon's flaw.the resignation and pardon of President Richard M." ante at 471 U. with whom JUSTICE WHITE and JUSTICE MARSHALL join. I fear. § 107. he didn't feel that the press was weak. Reporters. and he responded with reciprocal disdain.See 17 U. Ford reports. he was persuaded that [bb]"Nixon was out of touch with reality. [bb]"His pride and personal contempt for weakness had overcome his ability to tell the difference between right and wrong. dissenting. whom he also regarded as weak. (Curiously. The New York Times called The Post's feat "a second-rate burglary." Kennerly asked. The Ends of Power. were his adversaries."[eb] writes Ford.R. 579 courts. I'd often heard him speak disparagingly of those whom he felt to be soft and expedient. claiming that its coup represented "first-rate enterprise" and arguing that it had burglarized nothing. Schlesinger was opposed to bombings. the White House photographer. had considered it. our special Spring Books number. [bb]"he detested weakness in other people. Nixon. David Kennerly. The speech lasted fifteen minutes. Ford tells us. the view carried the day. At issue was whether airstrikes against the Cambodians were desirable. 1979."[eb] [Footnote 2/23] Page 471 U. 57. we will discuss some of the ethical problems raised by the issue of disclosure. S. On hearing Nixon's resignation speech." In the issue of The Nation dated May 5. Protection of the copyright owner's economic interest is achieved in this case through an exceedingly narrow definition of the scope of fair use. First. P. Following a lull in the conversation. I therefore respectfully dissent."[eb] [Footnote 2/26] In February of last year.[eb] according to Ford. did The Nation's use of material from the Ford manuscript in forms other than direct quotation from that manuscript infringe Harper & Row's copyright. He knew they didn't like him.On David Kennerly. that publication of the Haldeman memoir came under the Fair Comment doctrine long recognized by the Page 471 U. JUSTICE BRENNAN. and at the end I was convinced Nixon was out of touch with reality. According to Ford. I A This case presents two issues. up spoke the 30-year-old White House photographer."[eb] [Footnote 2/25] all of which leads Ford to wonder whether Nixon had known in advance about Watergate. he sensed. which Ford felt lacked an adequate plea for forgiveness. The Court holds that The Nation's quotation of 300 words from the unpublished 200. did the quotation of approximately 300 words from the manuscript infringe the copyright because this quotation did not constitute "fair use" within the meaning Page 471 U. 558.000-word manuscript of President Gerald R. [bb]"It would be far better to have Navy jets from the Coral Sea make surgical strikes against specific targets.C. this zealous defense of the copyright owner's prerogative will. when The Washington Post obtained and printed advance excerpts from H. 578 On Nixon's Character. stifle the broad dissemination of ideas and information copyright is intended to nurture.S. on the eve of its publication by Times Books. apparently. S. The progress of arts and sciences and the robust public debate essential to an enlightened citizenry are illserved by this constricted reading of the fair use doctrine. and that "There is a fundamental journalistic principle here -." The Post disagreed. Schlesinger was arguing with Kissinger and Ford over the appropriate response to the seizure of the Mayaguez.a First Amendment principle that was central to the Pentagon Papers case. Second. S. [bb]was "pride. Ford infringed the copyright in that manuscript. but following several seconds of silence." "A terribly proud man. S. Although the Court pursues the laudable goal of protecting "the economic incentive to create and disseminate ideas. "that this might be the act of a local Cambodian commander who has just taken it into his own hands to stop any ship that comes by?" Nobody. even though the quotations related to a historical event of undoubted significance -."[eb] Ford decided.
par. intended to confer upon one who might happen to be the first to report a historic event the exclusive right for any period to spread the knowledge of it. 7 (1909). Cf. J. or facts contained in his or her work. the creative process would wither and scholars would be forced into unproductive replication of the research of their predecessors. of America v. 429(1984). The use of 300 words of quotation was. indeed. [Footnote 3/1] Because I disagree with the Court's fair use holding. Runge.R. this section extends copyright protection to an author's literary form. (1971) (BRENNAN. protect only the form of expression. 270 (1964). but permits free use by others of the ideas and information the author communicates. S. . beyond the scope of fair use.of § 107 of the Copyright Act.. 417.. 385 U.2d 972. and society's competing interest in the free flow of ideas. 74-75 (1964). H. 433 U. when they empowered Congress" "to promote the progress of science and useful arts.. if a politician could copyright his speeches or a philosopher his treatises. n. .. See Hoehling v. form in which the author expressed intellectual concepts"). information. See 1 Nimmer § 2. 13 (1977).. and wide-open. And every citizen must be permitted freely to marshal ideas and facts in the advocacy of particular political choices..R. 94-1476. S. 433 U. cert.. 403 U. dissenting from denial of certiorari). 107-108 (1974) ("Copyright does not preclude others from using the ideas or information revealed by the author's work. Inc. The "originality" requirement now embodied in § 102 of the Copyright Act is crucial to maintenance of the appropriate balance between these competing interests. J.S. S. Sullivan. 215.C. S. on the other hand. No." New York Times Co. it is necessary for me to decide the threshold copyrightability question. pp. 2222. 1009 (1967)." Garrison v. Zacchini v. Were an author able to prevent subsequent authors from using concepts." H. B "The enactment of copyright legislation by Congress under the terms of the Constitution is not based upon any natural right that the author has in his writings . 56-57 (1976) (same). of course. by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries" "(Const. 60th Cong. See S. robust. ideas. S.S.Rep. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co. No." Sony Corp. 376 U. leaves no room for a statutory monopoly over information and ideas. 618 F. [Footnote 3/4] . 403 U. 581 in the light of the legislative history. S. Congress thus seeks to define the rights included in copyright so as to serve the public welfare. 17 U. Art I. 404 U. It pertains to the literary . 248 U. Associated Press. and commerce. 464 U. . S. Inc. A broad dissemination of principles. [Footnote 3/2] Properly interpreted Page 471 U. 8). § 8. S. 248 U." Lee v. 2d Sess. [Footnote 3/3] Page 471 U. 309 (CA2 1966). The challenge of copyright is to strike the "difficult balance between the interests of authors and inventors in the control and exploitation of their writings and discoveries. Inc.Rep. 379 U. 234 (1918). 464 U. "It is not to be supposed that the framers of the Constitution. New York Times Co. v.. The Court finds no need to resolve the threshold copyrightability issue.Rep. and not the ideas expressed"). 379 U. Universal City Studios. S. but upon the ground that the welfare of the public will be served and progress of science and useful arts will be promoted by securing to authors for limited periods the exclusive rights to their writings. the Court finds. Random House. ideas. Our "profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited. . This limitation of protection to literary form precludes any claim of copyright in facts. including historical narration. on the one hand. Rosemont Enterprises.11[A]. 366 F. v.. n. 582 The "promotion of science and the useful arts" requires this limit on the scope of an author's control." International News Service v. denied. Louisiana. 562. Universal City Studios. § 107. 64. S. and thus obtain a monopoly on the ideas they contained. . 713. 726. and not necessarily so as to maximize an author's control over his or her product. This limitation on copyright also ensures consonance with our most important First Amendment values. S. Inc. 979 (CA2 1980). 254. v. S. and factual information is crucial to the robust public debate and informed citizenry that are "the essence of selfgovernment. 577. S. and thus a copyright infringement. S. 376 U. pp. at 2-158. 887. "The arena of public debate would be quiet. S. United States.2d 303. No. concurring) ("[T]he copyright laws. 93-983. 893 (1971) (Douglas.Accord.
The Structure of Presentation. though. some leeway must be given to subsequent authors seeking to convey facts because those "wishing to express the ideas contained in a factual work Page 471 U. 570-579. [Footnote 3/12] When The Nation was not quoting Mr. its efforts to convey the historical information in the Ford manuscript did not so closely and substantially track Mr. [Footnote 3/11] Some of The Nation's discussion of the pardon does roughly track the order in which the Ford manuscript presents information about the pardon.It follows that infringement of copyright must be based on a taking of literary form. Wall Street Transcript Corp.C. Ford's structure. 583 literary form and information or ideas is often elusive in practice. Infringement would thus have to be based Page 471 U. S. 488 (CA9 1984). as opposed to the ideas or information contained in a copyrighted work. [Footnote 3/10] Third. Deciding whether an infringing appropriation of literary form has occurred is difficult for at least two reasons. With respect to this similarity. his latter-day reflections on some events of his Presidency.S. Mr. it is difficult to suggest that a 2. The information The Nation presents is drawn from scattered sections of the Ford work. Most of what Mr. 585 Nation did use occasional sentences that closely resembled language in the original Ford manuscript. the test for infringement has defied precise formulation. e.g. Ford's factual narrative of the Nixon resignation and pardon. but took the form of synopsis of lengthy discussions in the Ford manuscript. Apart from the quotations. Second. infringement must be based on a substantial appropriation of literary form. Inc. 558 F.2d 91 (CA2 1977). S. § 106. 587 chronologically and cannot claim infringement when a subsequent author similarly presents the facts of history in a chronological manner. At most. however. and most of the history he recounted.See ante at 471 U. and how much of the first author's language and structure has the second author appropriated. S. Section 107 states: . The Nation paraphrased disparate isolated sentences from the original. First. Much of the information The Nation conveyed was not in the form of paraphrase at all. Ford. and does not appear in the sequence in which Mr. v. 736 F. No copyright can be claimed in this information quainformation. Ford presented it.. Section 106 explicitly makes the grant of exclusive rights "[s]ubject to section 107 through 118. the inquiry proceeds along two axes:how closely has the second author tracked the first author's particular language and structure of presentation. [Footnote 3/8] In the course of this summary presentation. A finding of infringement based on paraphrase generally requires far more close and substantial a tracking of the original language than occurred in this case. Ford's expression of this information.. virtually all of the material in The Nation's article indirectly recounted Mr. much less a chapter or the work as a whole. [Footnote 3/5] In general. S. Scrabble Crossword Game Players. [Footnote 3/6] In the present case the infringement analysis must be applied to a historical biography in which the author has chronicled the events of his White House tenure and commented on those events from his unique perspective.000-word article could bodily appropriate the structure of a 200. Ford's language and structure as to constitute an appropriation of literary form. The Nation paraphrased nothing approximating the totality of a single paragraph. First. therefore. 586 often can choose from only a narrow range of expression. S. Wainwright Securities Inc. were simply not represented in The Nation's article. Also. II The Nation is thus liable in copyright only if the quotation of 300 words infringed any of Harper & Row's exclusive rights under § 106 of the Act. 584 on too close and substantial a tracking of Mr." 17 U. Ford has done no more than present the facts Page 471 U. The article does not mimic Mr. the distinction between Page 471 U.2d 485.. This determination is equally challenging. Ford created. much of what The Nation paraphrased was material in which Harper & Row could claim no copyright. [Footnote 3/7] The Language. The Page 471 U." Landsbeg v. Not surprisingly. and his perceptions of the personalities at the center of those events. [Footnote 3/9] But these linguistic similarities are insufficient to constitute an infringement for three reasons. Second. See. S.000-word book.
R. bright-line approach to fair use.. is not some unforeseen byproduct of a statutory scheme intended primarily to ensure a return for works of the imagination. at 56-57. It pertains to the literary . With respect to a work of history. organizing. . . at 66 ("[T]he endless variety of situations and combinations of circumstances that can arise in particular cases precludes the formulation of exact rules in the statute"). To ensure the progress of arts and sciences and the integrity Page 471 U. and not in the particular collocation of words through which the information and ideas are expressed. at 464 U. and each case raising the question must be decided on its own facts. S. however. Copyright thus does not protect that which is often of most value in a work of history. and courts must resist the tendency to reject the fair use defense on the basis of their feeling that an author of history has been deprived of the full value of his or her labor. and the effect of this use of literary form on the value of or market for the original? Page 471 U. The urge to compensate for subsequent use of information and ideas is perhaps understandable." "(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole. and do not mechanistically resolve fair use issues. The copyright laws serve as the "engine of free expression. No. n. S. S. The literary form contained in works like "A Time to Heal" reflects only a part of the labor that goes into the book." H. 94-473. .C. including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes. the amount of literary form used. 449. p. scholarship or research. at 65.Rep. particularly the memoirs of a public official. sifting. in light of the purpose for the use." ante at 471 U. Universal City Studios." 17 U. 558. This. 588 quotation was a noninfringing fair use within the meaning of § 107. the nature of the copyrighted work. S." "(2) the nature of the copyrighted work. A subsequent author's taking of information and ideas is in no sense piratical. The value this labor produces lies primarily in the information and ideas revealed. id. Protection against only substantial appropriation of literary form does not ensure historians a return commensurate with the full value of their labors. Inc. 31."Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106. of America v. S." H. only when the statutory monopoly does not choke off multifarious indirect uses and consequent broad dissemination of information and ideas. 590 . comment. and" "(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. Congress "eschewed a rigid. It is the labor of collecting. 94-1476. 94-1476. The question must always be: was the subsequent author's use of literary form a fair use within the meaning of § 107. § 107. No. teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use)." The question here is whether The Nation's Page 471 U. 589 Limiting the inquiry to the propriety of a subsequent author's use of the copyright owner's literary form is not easy in the case of a work of history. however. The statutory factors do. These factors are not necessarily the exclusive determinants of the fair use inquiry. "no generally applicable definition is possible. for purposes such as criticism. An inequity seems to lurk in the idea that much of the fruit of the historian's labor may be used without compensation. the statutorily prescribed analysis cannot properly be conducted without constant attention to copyright's crucial distinction between protected literary form and unprotected information or ideas.S. the fair use of a copyrighted work . 448. A court is to apply an "equitable rule of reason" analysis.Rep. and reflecting that predominates in the creation of works of history such as this one. provide substantial guidance to courts undertaking the proper fact-specific inquiry.S. guided by four statutorily prescribed factors: "(1) the purpose and character of the use. is not an infringement of copyright. . at 464 U. because copyright law simply does not create any property interest in information and ideas. See also id. S. news reporting. This distinction is at the essence of copyright." Sony Corp.R. S. Congress made the affirmative choice that the copyright laws should apply in this way: "Copyright does not preclude others from using the ideas or information revealed by the author's work. 62 (1975). No.Rep. 464 U. form in which the author expressed intellectual concepts.
under those circumstances. and leads the Court to the wrong result in this case. its publication of Page 471 U.of First Amendment values. Like criticism and all other purposes Congress explicitly approved in § 107. the Court claims. like the Page 471 U.g. including criticism. solicited and unsolicited. news reporting. Two principals. A typical news story differs from an editorial precisely in that it presents newsworthy information in a straightforward and unelaborated manner. news reporting informs the public. a fact of which Congress was obviously aware when it enacted § 107. The failure to distinguish between information and literary form permeates every aspect of the Court's fair use analysis. comment. New York Time Co. Nor does the source of the information render The Nation's article any less a news report. 562. The Nation's purpose in quoting 300 words of the Ford manuscript was. The Ford work contained information about important events of recent history. the Court asserts that. Often books and manuscripts.furthered the public interest.dissemination of the information contained in the quotations of Mr." ante at 471 U. The Nation's stated purpose of scooping the competition should. Ante at 471 U. widely thought to be candidates for the Presidency. 591 the subject matter of news reports. [Footnote 3/13] In my judgment. Mr. 713 (1971). [Footnote 3/15] but then quickly offsets it against three purportedly countervailing considerations. and news reporting. S.. In light of the explicit congressional endorsement in § 107. S. 723 F. United States. 592 the Ford quotes is a presumptively unfair commercial use. through consistent prompt publication of news -. Because Harper & Row had no legitimate copyright interest in the information and ideas in the Ford manuscript. The Purpose of the Use. as the Court acknowledges. S. 562-563. Many uses § 107 lists as paradigmatic examples of fair use. the purpose for which Ford's literary form was borrowed strongly favors a finding of fair use. were. Ford and General Alexander Haig. Third. is inappropriate in the present context." Ante at 471 U. S. [Footnote 3/16] Nor should The Nation's intent to create a "news event" weigh against a finding of fair use. Such a rule. The Court of Appeals was therefore correct to conclude that the purpose of The Nation's use -. That The Nation objectively reported the information in the Ford manuscript without independent commentary in no way diminishes the conclusion that it was reporting news. and therefore its readership. E. The record suggests only that The Nation sought to be the first to reveal the information in the Ford manuscript. A news business earns its reputation. the manuscripts are unpublished at the time of the news report. S. More importantly. Application of the statutorily prescribed analysis with attention to the distinction between information and literary form leads to a straightforward finding of fair use within the meaning of § 107. 563. the Court's failure to maintain the distinction between information and literary form colors the analysis of this point. the Court claims that The Nation's stated desire to create a "news event" signaled an illegitimate purpose of supplanting the copyright owner's right of first publication. First. ideas and information must not be freighted with claims of proprietary right. The Court's reliance on the commercial nature of The Nation's use as "a separate factor that tends to weigh against a finding of fair use. Second. Frequently. 403 U. See ante at 471 U. S. To negate any argument favoring fair use based on news reporting or criticism because that reporting or criticism was published for profit is to render meaningless the congressional imprimatur placed on such uses. [Footnote 3/14] Section 107 lists news reporting as a prime example of fair use of another's expression. The Nation had every right to seek to be the first to disclose these facts and ideas to the public. because The Nation publishes for profit. 593 Court's automatic presumption against news reporting for profit. Ford's work -.2d 195. are Page 471 U. The Court concedes the validity of the news reporting purpose. the language of § 107 makes clear that Congress saw the spread of knowledge and information as the strongest justification for a properly limited appropriation of expression. would undermine the congressional validation of the news reporting purpose.and often through "scooping" rivals. have no negative bearing on the . the Court's fair use analysis has fallen to the temptation to find copyright violation based on a minimal use of literary form in order to provide compensation for the appropriation of information from a work of history. S. v. 207-208 (CA2 1983). 561. at the time of The Nation's publication in 1979. because its editor "knowingly exploited a purloined manuscript. The Nation acted in bad faith. S. are generally conducted for profit in this country.
S. supra. S.13-74. S. S. . "[I]nformational works. The Nation's awareness of an objection that has a significant chance of being adjudged unfounded cannot amount to bad faith. of America v. of America v. 496-497 (BLACKMUN." we held last Term that the fair use inquiry could never be resolved on the basis of such a "two-dimensional" categorical approach. [Footnote 3/18] At this point. S. 595 The Court acknowledges that "[t]he law generally recognizes a greater need to disseminate factual works than works of fiction or fantasy.. 471 U." ante at 471 U. Inc. S. are less protected. it presumes intolerable Page 471 U. ante at 471 U. 40. because no copyright can be claimed in ideas or information. 464 U. But the Court discounts the force of this consideration. See Sony Corp.S. 594 At several points the Court brands this conduct thievery. See Sony Corp.. at 464 U. [Footnote 3/20] will depend on the nature of the copyrighted work. S. 552-555. . J. S. all common law causes of action have been abandoned or dismissed in this case. The Court is ambiguous as to whether it relies on the force of the presumption against prepublication fair use or an analysis of the purpose and effect of this particular use. the amount of expression used. [Footnote 3/19] Whether a Page 471 U. Thus the second statutory factor also favors a finding of fair use in this case.based on no more than a quick litmus test for prepublication timing. primarily on the ground that "[t]he fact that a work is unpublished is a crucial element of its nature. See ante at 471 U.in particular the usurpation of the economic interest [Footnote 3/21] -. 564.." like the Ford manuscript. with ante at 471 U. Universal City Studios.claim of fair use. 490. 556. e. certain uses might be tolerable for some purposes but not for others." ibid. and the medium in which the second author communicates. Page 471 U. see ante at 471 U.Compare ante at 471 U. then the copyright owner would have had no basis in law for objecting. 552-555. the most that can be said is that The Nation made use of the contents of the manuscript knowing the copyright owner would not sanction the use." 464 U. No court has found that The Nation possessed the Ford manuscript illegally or in violation of any common law interest of Harper & Row. Indeed the Court's reliance on this factor would seem to amount to little more than distaste for the standard journalistic practice of seeking to be the first to publish news. Inc. despite the copyright owner's objection. at 464 U. These statements reflect the principle. S. Universal City Studios. To the extent the Court relies on the presumption. Imputing bad faith on the basis of no more than knowledge of such an objection. that the scope of fair use is generally broader when the source of borrowed expression is a factual or historical work. See 3 Nimmer § 13.. n. the Court impermissibly prejudices the inquiry and impedes arrival at the proper conclusion that the "purpose" factor of the statutorily prescribed analysis strongly favors a finding of fair use in this case. S. the timing of prepublication use. The Court's reliance on The Nation's putative bad faith is equally unwarranted. of America v. at 464 U. dissenting). 563. and is perhaps influenced by the Court's unspoken tendency in this case to find infringement based on the taking of information and ideas.. S. of America v. See. Universal City Studios. . all copyrights are fungible" and that "[c]opying a news broadcast may have a stronger claim to fair use than copying a motion picture.. 555 ("Under ordinary circumstances. 564. 464 U. the author's right to control the first public appearance of his undisseminated expression will outweigh a claim of fair use"). Whether the quotation of 300 words was an infringement or a fair use within the meaning of § 107 is a close question that has produced sharp division in both this Court and the Court of Appeals. at 13-73 . This judgment is unsupportable. Even if the manuscript had been "purloined" by someone. and that "[s]ome of the briefer quotations from the memoir are arguably necessary to convey the facts.'" Ante at 471 U. 40 (rejecting categorical requirement of "productive use"). S. With respect to the appropriation of information and ideas other than the quoted words. If the Copyright Act were held not to prohibit the use. 723 F. S. [Footnote 3/17] On the basis of the record in this case.S. 563. 597 injury -.g. 596 particular prepublication use will impair any interest the Court identifies as encompassed within the right of first publication. In Sony Corp.2d at 199-201. n. Page 471 U. at 464 U. suggested in § 107(2) of the Act. Inc. 455. 455." Sony Corp. "that readily lend themselves to productive use by others. The Nature of the Copyrighted Work.05[A][2]. the Court introduces into analysis of this case a categorical presumption against prepublication fair use. n. we stated that "not . Universal City Studios. The Nation's use was perfectly legitimate. This categorical presumption is unwarranted on its own terms and unfaithful to congressional intent. S. 40. Also. S. Because "Congress has plainly instructed us that fair use analysis calls for a sensitive balancing of interests. S. nothing in this record imputes culpability to The Nation. Inc.S.
and would appear to be another result of the Court's failure to distinguish between information and literary form. see ante at 471 U. as a qualitative matter. S. however. The vast majority of what the District Court considered the heart of the Ford work.To the extent the Court purports to evaluate the facts of this case. and are not rich in expressive content. Ford's expression of his reflections on Page 471 U. The Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used. 17 U." ante at 471 U. 563. Page 471 U.Supp. 602-603. S. By considering this interest as a component of the "nature" of the copyrighted work. S. The Court states that "[t]he portions actually quoted were selected by Mr. the only interest The Nation's prepublication use might have infringed is the copyright owner's interest in capturing the full economic value of initial release.and not as a presumed element of the "nature" of the copyright. On the basis of no more than this observation. Ford's matter-of-fact representation of the words of others in conversations with him. does not dispose of the inquiry. 601 . The judgment that this taking was quantitatively "infinitesimal. 564.Rep.C. The Nation quoted only approximately 300 words from a manuscript of more than 200.S. and is properly analyzed as such. is not a privacy interest at all. See S. consisted of ideas and information The Nation was free to use. a portion of the quoted material was drawn from the most poignant expression in the Ford manuscript. at 64. the Court goes on to evaluate independently the quality of the expression appearing in The Nation's article.05[A]. For this reason. It may well be that. S. therefore. Beyond these quotations. This author intended the words in the manuscript to be a public statement about his Presidency. S. is the "deliberate choice on the part of the copyright owner" to keep expression confidential. 565. See also 3 Nimmer § 13. such quotations are "arguably necessary adequately to convey the facts. 94-473. S. S. 1062. Navasky as among the most powerful passages. Rather. the Court's analysis deflates The Nation's claim that the informational nature of the work supports fair use without any inquiry into the actual or potential economic harm of The Nation's particular prepublication use. Ibid. Lacking too is any suggestion that The Nation's use interfered with the copyright owner's interest in editorial control of the manuscript." Ante at 471 U." this third statutory factor disfavors a finding of fair use. it is no more than an economic interest in capturing the full value of initial release of information to Page 471 U. [Footnote 3/23] To support Page 471 U.000 words. 598 the public." 723 F. But appropriation of the "heart" of the manuscript in this sense is irrelevant to copyright analysis because copyright does not preclude a second author's use of information and ideas. therefore. The Nation made use of the Ford quotes on the eve of official publication. An evaluation of substantiality in qualitative terms is also required. Perhaps tacitly recognizing that reliance on the District Court finding is unjustifiable. § 107(4) -. the Court purports to rely on the District Court factual findings that The Nation had taken "the heart of the book. When the District Court made this finding. What the Court depicts as the copyright owner's "confidentiality" interest. but the "totality" of the information and reflective commentary in the Ford work.2d at 209. [Footnote 3/24] the Court adheres to its conclusion that The Nation appropriated the heart of the Ford manuscript. and the quotes are drawn from isolated passages in disparate sections of the work. The Court holds that. in particular The Nation made use of six examples of Mr. and perhaps also inference from the fact that the quotes were important to The Nation's article. its analysis relies on sheer speculation. More difficult questions arise with respect to judgments about the importance to this case of the amount and substantiality of the quotations used." 557 F. at 13-73 ("[T]he scope of the fair use doctrine is considerably narrower with respect to unpublished works which are held confidential by their copyright owners") (emphasis added). 599 events or perceptions about President Nixon. Thus. S.in the passage on which the Court places great reliance. see ante at 553 --recognized as the impetus behind narrowing fair use for unpublished works. it was evaluating not the quoted words at issue here. See infra at 471 U. 600 this conclusion. [Footnote 3/22] The fair use inquiry turns on the propriety of the use of these quotations with admittedly strong expressive content. Much of the quoted material was Mr. most of the value of the manuscript did lie in the information and ideas The Nation used. This reliance is misplaced. No. a consideration that the Senate Report -. "in view of the expressive value of the excerpts and their key role in the infringing work. Lacking. 1072 (SDNY 1983). the question of economic harm is properly considered under the fourth statutory factor -.the effect on the value of or market for the copyrighted work. The quotation of 300 words from the manuscript infringed no privacy interest of Mr. Ford.
that caused Time to abrogate its serialization agreement. Mr. The Nation "competed for a share of the market of prepublication excerpts" ante at 471 U. while the question is not easily resolved." Ibid. lies not only in revelation of previously unknown fact. I fully agree with this holding. The Court of Appeals specifically held that "the evidence does not support a finding that it was the very limited use of expression per se which led to Time's decision not to print excerpts. Ford's observations and reflections about President Nixon." Page 471 U. it is sufficient that the entire articlecontaining the quotes eroded the serialization market potential of Mr. by using some quotes in a story about the Nixon pardon. represents most of the real value of the work in this case is perhaps best revealed by the following provision in the contract between Harper & Row and Mr. Thus. I agree with the Court's conclusion that The Nation appropriated some literary form of substantial quality. The Court acknowledges as much: "[E]ven substantial quotations might qualify as a fair use in a review of a published work or a news account of a speech that had been delivered to the public. S. For the Court. and is properly evaluated as such. The amount and substantiality of the use -. With respect to the motivation for the pardon and the insights into the psyche of the fallen President. S. If The Nation competed with Time. That is really an objection to the effect of this use on the market for the copyrighted work. The Nation published significant information and ideas from the Ford manuscript. and not the publication of the few quotations. Unfortunately. that effect was the product of wholly legitimate activity. at 13-76. It is difficult to see how the use of these quoted words in a news report is less appropriate. there is little question that such a use would be fair use within the meaning of § 107 of the Act. citing 3 Nimmer § 13. That the information. Ante at 471 U. 603 723 F. In essence. then whatever the negative effect on the serialization market. S. S. 568.2d at 208. Ford: "Author acknowledges that the value of the rights granted to publisher hereunder would be substantially diminished by Author's public discussion of the unique information not previously disclosed about Author's career and personal life which will be . and not the literary form." Ante at 471 U.At least with respect to the six particular quotes of Mr. the Court finds that. after all. S. 566. the Court holds. 602 timing of that use. it is difficult to say that the use of the six quotations was gratuitous in relation to the news reporting purpose.in both quantitative and qualitative terms -. for example. that the substantiality of the expression taken was clearly excessive or inappropriate to The Nation's news reporting purpose. the Court's failure to distinguish between the use of information and the appropriation of literary form badly skews its analysis of this factor. Anteat 471 U. Ford's work. Conceding that even substantial quotation is appropriate in a news report of apublished work. but also in revelation of the thoughts.05[A]. Ford's reflections and perceptions are so laden with emotion and deeply personal value judgments that full understanding is immeasurably enhanced by reproducing a limited portion of Mr. S." See ante at 471 U. motivations. For purposes of fair use analysis. The Nation's publication indisputably precipitated Time's eventual cancellation. On the basis of Time's cancellation of its serialization agreement. 564. the competition was not for a share of the market in excerpts of literary form. 567. The Effect on the Market. 566-567. because Time planned to excerpt from the chapters about the pardon. Ford's own words. ideas. however. and the Court properly focuses on whether The Nation's use adversely affected Harper & Row's serialization potential and not merely the market for sales of the Ford work itself. If it was this publication of information. The importance of the work. but for a share of the market in the new information in the Ford work. S. Wholly apart from these quoted words. The Court correctly notes that the effect on the market "is undoubtedly the single most important element of fair use. the determinative factor is again that the substantiality of the use was inappropriate in relation to the prepublication Page 471 U. But that does not mean that The Nation's use of the 300 quoted words caused this injury to Harper & Row. and fears of two Presidents at a critical moment in our national history. Had these quotations been used in the context of a critical book review of the Ford work. I do not agree. the Court would seem to agree that this quotation was not clearly inappropriate in relation to The Nation's news reporting purpose. the Court finds that "[r]arely will a case of copyright infringement present such clear-cut evidence of actual damage.would have certainly been appropriate to the purpose of such a use.
I must conclude that the Court has simply adopted an exceedingly narrow view of fair use in order to impose liability for what was in essence a taking of unprotected information. the statutorily prescribed process of weighing the four statutory fair use factors discussed above leads naturally to a conclusion that The Nation's limited use of literary form was not an infringement. including television. 74-75. 605 motivating that quotation. [Footnote 3/25] Page 471 U. Associated Press. Both the purpose of the use and the nature of the copyrighted work strongly favor the fair use defense here."International News Service v. Once the distinction between information and literary form is made clear. and Author agrees that Author will endeavor not to disseminate any such information in any media.was not shown to injure Harper & Row's economic interest. . but it has no right to set up copyright as a shield from competition in that market.as opposed to the use of information -. S. I dissent. a portion of the expression appropriated was among the most poignant in the Ford manuscript. J. at 379 U. because the appropriation of literary form -. Because The Nation was the first to convey the information in this case. Louisiana.. But it is difficult to conclude that this taking was excessive in relation to the news reporting purpose.379 U. it did perhaps take from Harper & Row some of the value that publisher sought to garner for itself through the contractual arrangement with Ford and the license to Time. The Court has perhaps advanced the ability of the historian -. The factor that is perhaps least favorable to the claim of fair use is the amount and substantiality of the expression used. 263 (Brandeis. because copyright does not protect information. Harper & Row had every right to seek to monopolize revenue from that potential market through contractual arrangements. S. 604 Balancing the Interests. 484. But the Court does so only by risking the robust debate of public issues that is the "essence of self-government.S. Without question. radio and newspaper and magazine interviews prior to the first publication of the work hereunder. The Nation appropriated Mr.included in the Work. Ford's expression for a purpose Congress expressly authorized in § 107 and borrowed from a work whose nature justifies some appropriation to facilitate the spread of information." App. The Nation had every right to seek to be the first to publish that information. The Court imposes liability upon The Nation for no other reason than that The Nation succeeded in being the first to provide certain information to the public. at 248 U. 248 U.or at least the public official who has recently left office -. In any event. The Nation was providing the grist for that robust debate.to capture the full economic value of information in his or her possession." Garrison v. S. [Footnote 3/26] In light of the circumscribed scope of the quotation in The Nation's article and the undoubted validity of the purpose Page 471 U.S. This holding "effect[s] an important extension of property rights and a corresponding curtailment in the free use of knowledge and of ideas. any uncertainty with respect to the propriety of the amount of expression borrowed should be resolved in favor of a finding of fair use. S. The contract thus makes clear that Harper & Row sought to benefit substantially from monopolizing the initial revelation of information known only to Ford. III The Court's exceedingly narrow approach to fair use permits Harper & Row to monopolize information. dissenting).
Documents Similar To 471 U.S. 539
a proposed health planning model.pdf
Project Management Lecture 6 10-4-2012 Project Team Building Conflict and Negotiation
Copyright, Trademark, ACTA, ect make sense - in order to protect artists and researchers.
NATS1760 Assignment 23
Great Depression/Recession Observation
471 U.S. 539 estará disponible el