[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Random House v RosettaBooks
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: Random House v RosettaBooks
- From: Ann Okerson <aokerson@pantheon.yale.edu>
- Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 19:04:14 -0400 (EDT)
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 15:35:18 -0700 From: "BARBARA PEARSON" <BPEARSON@statelib.wa.gov> To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu> Subject: Re: Random House v RosettaBooks That's interesting. Movie rights are negotiated separately from original print rights (I think). Paperback rights are negotiated separately from original print rights (I think). So why would they all of a sudden think that electronic rights were automatic? Hmmmm. (not on your list, but couldn't help responding when I saw this) Barbara Pearson Washington State Library PO Box 42460 Olympia WA 98504-2460 (360)753-5591 bpearson@statelib.wa.gov ____________ >>> cahamake@email.uncc.edu 04/18/01 02:41PM >>> Mike Somers recently forwarded to me a link on a lawsuit I had not heard about, but which has explosive ramifications for the nascent e-book industry. Random House v RosettaBooks for the whole article see: http://www.rosettabooks.com/pages/legal.html=20 RosettaBooks has contractually acquired and paid for the electronic-publishing rights to nearly 100 titles, including several works by William Styron, Kurt Vonnegut and Robert Parker. On February 27, 2001, Random House, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Bertlesmann, filed suit against RosettaBooks LLC and Arthur Klebanoff, individually, in federal court in the Southern District of New York. The suit alleges that Random House owns exclusive electronic rights to the titles by William Styron, Kurt Vonnegut and Robert Parker and that Rosetta is infringing Random House's rights by publishing these titles electronically. Fundamentally, Random House argues that the limited grants it received 20-to-40 years ago to "print, publish and sell in book form" should now be interpreted to include e-books. Random House has sought injunctive relief including an order which would prevent Rosetta from approaching the authors of the nearly 21,000 Random House backlist titles. Random House claims to own the electronic rights to its entire backlist whether there is a specific electronic rights grant in the contract or not.
- Prev by Date: Re: Qys about Nature new site licensing policy
- Next by Date: Nature
- Prev by thread: Re: Random House v RosettaBooks
- Next by thread: Re: Nature subscriptions response from faculty
- Index(es):