The original World Trade Center during construction. (Wikipedia) |
Editor's note: A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit alleging that Victor E. Sasson and "Eye on The Record" infringed on The Record's copyrights when the blog published photographs and a news article from the paper, even though full credit was included in both instances. Here is the story from the New Jersey Law Journal, with bracketed material that corrects several factual errors.
Pending Copyright Application Held
Not Enough To Sue for Infringement
By Mary Pat Gallagher
Weighing
in on an issue that has split the federal courts, a District of New
Jersey judge says a copyright infringement suit cannot be brought
without an existing copyright registration. A pending application will
not suffice.
The
Jan. 4 ruling, in North Jersey Media Group v. Sasson, 12-cv-3568, is a
setback for the owner of The Record of [Woodland Park] in its suit alleging a
former reporter infringed on its copyrights in an article and three
photographs.
One
of the photos is an iconic image taken on Sept. 11, 2001, by Record
photographer Thomas Franklin, showing three, dust-covered firefighters
raising the American flag at Ground Zero, against the backdrop of the
World Trade Center wreckage.
North
Jersey Media alleges that in October 2009, Victor Sasson posted the
image on Eye on the Record — a blog that is highly critical of the
newspaper — without permission or copyright notice and without
mentioning Franklin, the Record or North Jersey Media [Group].
[A link to the blog post in question appears below, and the text clearly gives credit to Franklin and The Record.]
[A link to the blog post in question appears below, and the text clearly gives credit to Franklin and The Record.]
The
newspaper sent Sasson a cease-and-desist letter, to which Sasson
responded the same day with a promise that he would limit his blog
entries to critiques of Record articles, according to the complaint.
Three
other works were allegedly posted on the blog, on May 17, 2012: a news
story reporting the misconduct and fraud conviction of [former] Hackensack Police
Chief Ken Zisa one day earlier, and accompanying photos of Zisa and his
former girlfriend, Kathleen Tiernan, who was convicted at the same
trial of filing a false insurance report.
North Jersey Media [Group] sued on June 13, seeking injunctive relief and statutory damages, plus legal fees and costs.
It
claimed Sasson used its Ground Zero photo "to attract and sustain
attention to his blog" and his actions irreparably damaged it and would
continue to do so, absent an injunction.
On July 10, Sasson moved to dismiss the claims about the Zisa article and related photographs.
Unlike
the Ground Zero photograph, for which the Record had a registered
copyright, a copyright application was still pending for those works.
In
his ruling, U.S. District Judge William Martini discussed the split
among courts over what rule should govern infringement actions: the
"application approach," under which a pending copyright application
provides a basis for suit, or the "registration approach," under which a
certificate of registration from the U.S. Copyright Office is a
prerequisite.
Sasson
cited the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit's ruling in
Dawes-Lloyd v. Publish America, No. 10–3781 (2011), which affirmed
dismissal of a copyright suit over a children's book because the
plaintiff author presented no evidence of copyright registration.
But
Martini said Dawes-Lloyd did not squarely address the question, noting
the plaintiff there apparently never attempted to register her
copyright.
In
opting for the registration approach, Martini relied on Patrick Collins
v. Doe, 1-26, 11-cv-7247, decided by U.S. District Judge Legrome Davis
in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Dec. 30, 2011.
Davis read Dawes-Lloyd as suggesting that the Third Circuit would adopt the registration approach.
He
also construed the language of 17 U.S.C. § 411(a), which says no
copyright infringement suit shall be instituted "until preregistration
or registration of the copyright claim has been made" but also allows it
where a properly filed application has been refused.
Davis
reasoned that the reference to a refused application would be rendered
"nonsensical" if suit were allowed without registration.
He
wrote, "If mere submission of a complete copyright application
constituted registration under § 411(a), then logic tells us that the
Copyright Office could never 'refuse' registration of such an
application — registration would be automatic."
Agreeing
with Davis' construction, Martini dismissed without prejudice the three
infringement counts relating to Zisa, stating that until North Jersey
Media [Group] holds a certificate of copyright registration for them, it cannot
state a prima face case of copyright infringement. Once it does, it can
file an amended complaint, he said.
North
Jersey Media [Group's] lawyers, in-house counsel Jennifer A. Borg and William
Dunnegan of Dunnegan & Scileppi in New York, did not return calls.
Neither did Sasson's attorney, Joshua Weiner of Weiner & Weiner in
Morristown.
It
is not known when North Jersey Media [Group] applied for copyright on the Zisa
materials or how soon the application process will be concluded.
The
Copyright Office website indicates that processing times vary and that
the current average is 5.6 months, but only 2.5 months for
electronically filed applications.
Sasson's
blog posts were an issue in prior litigation, his age-discrimination
suit over his termination in 2008, at age 63, after [29] years at The
Record.
The
trial judge allowed North Jersey Media [Group] lawyers to use two blog entries
in cross-examining him and during summation, a ruling upheld by a state
appeals court in Sasson v. North Jersey Media Group, No. A-4024-09.
Here is a link to the original October 2009 post from "Eye on The Record" that was cited in the NJMG lawsuit:
Major detour on the road to a Pulitzer Prize
Here is a link to the original October 2009 post from "Eye on The Record" that was cited in the NJMG lawsuit:
Major detour on the road to a Pulitzer Prize
Congrats on your win.
ReplyDeleteCongrats on winning. Too bad the Record had to waste their time and money on beating a dead horse. Hope they learned their lesson and will not pursue it.
ReplyDeleteThanks. Outside counsel must have been pricey.
ReplyDeleteWas the Borgs sexual harassment lawsuits that you wrote about on Eye on the Record mentioned in the Federal suit?
ReplyDeleteNo. They weren't relevant.
DeleteBTW, the search function on this blog is working again.
This group makes a living suing people.
DeleteHow many cases do they win, if any?
I am no fan of Sarah Palin, but claiming Sarah Palin used their 911 photo for financial gain on a Facebook page is absurd.
Ann