[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Lexis-Nexis Statement Regarding the Tasini Decision

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-edited-by: aokerson@pantheon.yale.edu
Date: Fri,  6 Jul 2001 17:38:20 EDT
Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.2 -- ListProc(tm) by CREN
Precedence: bulk

At Ann Okerson's suggestion, I am posting the following statement from
Lexis-Nexis regarding the Tasini decision that was originally forwarded,
with slightly different wording, to the ICOLC list a few days ago.

Tim Jewell, Co-Chair
Academic Universe Content Advisory Committee


To: The International Coalition of Library Consortia

Subject:  LexisNexis Update on the Supreme Court decision on The New York
Times Co. v. Tasini

Thank you for your inquiry regarding the recent ruling by the U.S. Supreme
Court on The New York Times Co. v. Tasini .  As you know, the case
involves freelancers who sued The New York Times, LexisNexis and others,
claiming that the sale of an article to a print publication does not
include the right to license use of that article to an electronic
database.  The publishers, and LexisNexis, argued that such use is
allowable under copyright law.

The Supreme Court ruled June 25 in favor of the plaintiffs.  As a result
of the decision, some older articles will no longer be available on any
online service. However, for the past several years, publishers have been
obtaining broader rights from freelancers that allow freelance articles to
be reproduced in the LexisNexis database and other online services.  In
addition, LexisNexis has agreements with all its content providers to
obtain the appropriate rights and licenses to freelance articles.

LexisNexis prides itself on providing customers with the most thorough
coverage possible to guide key decisions. Anything that compromises this
mission, regardless of how small or large, is something we take very
seriously. That is why we intend to support lobbying efforts in Congress
that seek to solve the problems created by the Supreme Court's reading of
the legislative history of =A7 201(c) of the Copyright Act, upon which the
decision was based.

LexisNexis continues to provide access to billions of documents from
thousands of sources with leading-edge systems and tools for managing this
content.  We are committed to maintaining our leadership role in answering
questions and solving problems and in providing our customers with the
most comprehensive, highest-quality resources available.