Court Rules Against Photographers in Copyright Suit

An anonymous reader writes "Photo District News Online reports a Federal District Court in NY says that republishing Magazine content on a CD is the same as republishing the magazine itself. Photographers claim they should recieve additional compensation for images published on the CD that were published in the orginal magazine articles. IANAL but there is some additional interesting case history in the article as well."

Comments

Interesting Use of this ruling - Mirrors

[RussHart]

Firstly, IANAL also, but the way I've read this ruling, I see a potentially useful application of it.

If it is not a breach of copyright to re-publish electronically such as on CD, then that could be taken to mean that mirrors of sites would not be subject to copyright issues - which here, considering the /.-ing of various smaller sites, could lead to (hopefully) /. mirroring news stories if they feel the server could go down.

Only problem I see is that National Geographic had paid copyrights for all of the images once alredy, whereas nothing of the sort will have happened if this appliation...

Jungle Book

[t0ny]

This issue came up in a similiar form a while ago, and I think its still being litigated.

The estate of the guy that composed the music in Disney's Jungle Book sued Disney for not paying out royalties on the VHS, DVDs, CDs, etc, which were put out with that music. Disney's stance is that, since the contract did not specify VHS, DVD, CDs, etc, they are not obligated to pay royalties on anything but the film itself.

Somebody can score some easy karma by providing a link- Im to lazy to use google at the moment.

Re:Jungle Book

[angel'o'sphere]

Interesting.

In Europe its just thr other way around. If you get the right to "use" musik of a certain author in the cinema, you have no rights to use it in VHS, DVD etc. And you not only have to pay royalities, no, its a copy right violation to distribute his music with out a suiteable contract.

Regarding the Magazine its probably a question in USA: was it *content* from the original magazin, or was it the *original* magazine, only publiched in a different way? If that was a case it might give a dispute in europe as well. But in general our terms of authors rights are quite clear, copy rights are granted for a certein work in combination with a certain media.

Copyright law itself covers the case that if new distribution ways are discovered(DVD/internet) the original contract does not extend to those.

Further more it covers that an author ha a right to get a reasonable compensation. So if a smal unknown band makes a 4 minute intro track to a movi and that ovie ges faous, the band has the right to get a suitable extra compensation for publishing records/CDs with that title.

angel'o'sphere