Company Fined For Passing News Clips Around Internally

from the there's-this-thing-called-the-world-wide-web... dept

It may be time to add the Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA) to the list of ridiculous industry associations who are excessively focused on copyright to the detriment of their own businesses. The group, which includes a number of newspaper publishers as members, began an “anti-piracy” program recently and have announced its first “win.” An analyst firm has agreed to pay up a $300,000 settlement after an “insider” informed the SIIA that the firm passed around news clips to employees. This is very typical. Many companies employ news clipping services and receive copies of relevant news articles — and often they pass those around to the appropriate people. However, it appears that various news publishers think that any company that does this should purchase a separate license. The reporter points out that many, many companies pass around news clips internally all the time, and an SIIA representative insists that’s not true — suggesting he has no idea what goes on in many companies. However, the key point is that this clearly does nothing to benefit these publishers. There are very few companies that will go through the trouble of actually licensing the individual news for the sake of passing them around. Instead, they’ll either stop reading the clips altogether, or they’ll simply go to the web, where it’s free. Now, of course, it’s worth pointing out that we at Techdirt provide original news analysis (not clips) to plenty of companies all the time — and part of our contract is that we encourage the companies to pass our content around to as many people internally as possible. We know that the more people who see our analysis, the more useful and valuable it becomes. So, for firms worried about the SIIA suing you because you pass around news clips, feel free to give us a call.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: knowledge networks, siia

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Company Fined For Passing News Clips Around Internally”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
The Swiss Cheese Monster says:

Lawyers are funny creatures. I wonder what their DNA looks like.

Is a lawyer human? Is there some kind of ‘I no nothing if it benefits my bank account’ gene?

Maybe we need to look for the missing link among the ranks of lawyers. Seems like somewhere between animal and human lies the creature we all call lawyer.

Cem Kaner (user link) says:

Re: Company Fined For Passing News Clips Around In

“Lawyers are funny creatures. I wonder what their DNA looks like.”

SIIA is a group of software publishers, not a group of lawyers. The companies decide on policies that are sometimes absurd and reprehensible, but that might have legal justifiability. The policy choice — absurd and reprehensible — is the publisher’s.

Anonymous Coward says:

In Defense of Lawyers ...

It is a relatively small percentage of lawyers (none i know personally) that have the ‘I’ll do anything for my bank account’ gene, and probably 90% of big business men and women have the gene … which is who is giving these lawyers their commands.

Not that I don’t appreciate the joke, but it blames the wrong party here.

Richard O. Langley says:


OMG news,analysis,comments are now off limits?Has anyone heard of the Information Freedom Act??I guess if you pass a copy of Hustler magazine around the office you will be fined for distribution without a license or maybe theres a hidden message the goverment does’nt want you to see.What the HELL is our country becoming??Stand up America and tell them to KISS YOUR ASS!!

Fred says:

Most of the time, these services offer tiered licensing. That is, you can get a cheap license that lets a single user have the information, or you can get a site license for more money that lets you circulate the info internally. Dis the business model all you want (they deserve it), but if you as a customer sign up for the cheap service and then circulate the information internally, knowing that the license you purchased says you’re not supposed to do that, I don’t have a huge amount of sympathy. Better to either (a) buy the more expensive license or (b) forego the service entirely and pick one with more liberal licensing or just send users to the web for free.

J0ker says:

antinewspapersharing groups

like the riaa and mpaa is after limewire peeps, the news peeps will ferociously put an end to the sharing of news, ever gone to a restaraunt for breakfast and read a paper someone left behind?? thats p2p and usually anoymous, so they will go after the restaraunts for being the p2p client that allows this to happen (similiar to blaming limewire for people sharing copyrighted crap)

the mighty dollar rules and whats really scary is with all the problems we face in the world today, this is news (ut oh, did i share that!!??)

Norm (profile) says:


Two situations:

1. I subscribe to a news clipping service and I choose the option that allows one person to see/use the articles and no re-distribution. I redistribute the articles. I assume I am liable for damages. I violated the contract I signed.

2. I see an interesting article in a magazine and I bring it to work to show others. Is this a violation of copyright?

I find 1 to be reasonable but 2 shocking.

Lynn (user link) says:

More irony

Back in the old days when I saw these come around, it seems like a lot of them originated as a press release from our own marketing department.

So, if I understand this correctly, if we send a PR to a publication associated with SIIA and then make copies of it to celebrate the placement SIIA could sue us. This seems to be one of those cases where the upholding the (copyright) law has the side effect of making everybody involved look stupid.

Jen Larkin says:

It is illegal to fail to give credit or pay for ne

The company in question found articles in magazines, made copies of them, and made packets full of copied magazine articles. If you take an article out of a magazine and you fail to give the magazine credit when you show it to someone else, why would that be legal? If you take an article out of a magazine and xerox it and hand it to ten people, why would that be legal? You should buy 10 copies of the magazine if you want to do that– that would be legal.

If you use a news clipping service, you are bound by the terms of that service. However, no news clipping service was used in this case. In addition, the article states that the SIAA says that it is rare for companies to do this in the way that is illegal, and then lists ways to do it legally You think your company is giving you copies of articles cut out of magazines? They may have LICENSED them.

This is just as illegal as making 10 xeroxed copies of a book (minus all pages that list the publisher) and handing a copy to all of your friends. You bought one copy, you get to own or pass around one copy.

Newspapers pay Associated Press to publish AP articles. Why should a corporation be able to publish AP articles without paying the AP? This attitude about the issue is simply ridiculous.

Rich says:

News Clips being passed around (maybe yes maybe no

Some news clipping companies send the subscriber an actual cut out clipping from other news sources. They actually cut it out of a purchased paper and send the clipping to the client. But some clients photocopy this clipping service cutout and that’s where the original source news agency has a grip. If a company purchases 10 copies of the local newspaper with a story in it about the company, that is pretty legal to pass around (I think) but photocopying the item from the newspaper is not legal. At least that’s what I gather this is all about. Just like subscribing to a newsletter that costs big bucks and then photo copying it for others. Naughty Naughty, unless specifically allowed.

YMMV and I am not a lawyer..

Anon says:

Blame lawmakers - hate the game not the player

I really hate hearing what these lawyers were allowed to do. I’m not a lawyer and there are a lot of lawyers that I detest, but unfortunately, lawyers like these are simply doing their job according to how the laws are written. It is the lawmakers that create the framework of laws that require and bind lawyers.

Perhaps it makes more sense to vote for the lawmakers that are the smartest and most qualified instead of voting for those with affirmative-action titles like “the first disabled-gay-black-Chilean-female” (fill in the blank or chose any combination). Crappy lawmakers that go around punching capitol police instead of doing their job, and the voters who elect them are the ones who are to blame.

Me says:

I don’t get it. “We know that the more people who see our analysis, the more useful and valuable it becomes.” How does passing around information make it more valuable? Valuable to who? A piece of information that is common knowledge would no longer be valuable to the recipient. Are you saying that it encourages them to visit your site or come back to you, so it’s sort of like a PR/advertising?

mr p says:

its clear

this allows the people that control the licensing board alot more power over somthing that no one should have that much power over. its clear the media the massive global entity it has become is very vunerable to corruption and if we dont see it happen and let things go due to ignorance. who knows what it will turn into, we have to assess the motives and possibilities of all decisions regarding media as a whole.

the age of ignorance is opun us fear not as the war is only beggining

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...