U.S. Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor, whom President Obama named as his nominee for the Supreme Court on Tuesday morning, has a background in intellectual property litigation -- as an associate and partner at the Manhattan law firm Pavia & Harcourt and as a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. As a district court judge in 1997, Sotomayor heard a case brought by a group of freelance journalists who claimed various news outlets including the New York Times and Time Inc. violated copyright laws by reproducing their work on electronic databases and archives such as Lexis-Nexis without first obtaining their permission. Sotomayor ruled against the freelancers, arguing that the publishers were within their rights under the Copyright Act.
The appeals court reversed Sotomayor's decision, siding with the freelancers, and the Supreme Court upheld the appellate ruling 7-2. Justices John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer dissented, siding with Sotomayor's position. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the majority's opinion, saying: "If there is demand for a freelance article standing alone or in a new collection, the Copyright Act allows the freelancer to benefit from that demand; after authorizing initial publication, the freelancer may also sell the article to others. It would scarcely "preserve the author's copyright in a contribution" as contemplated by Congress... if a newspaper or magazine publisher were permitted to reproduce or distribute copies of the author's contribution in isolation or within new collective works."
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Tech Daily Dose does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
New Media
Online Politics
Tech Policy
Responded on October 2, 2009 9:12 PM
Monika
I think that Judge Sonia Sotomayor is a great choice for supreme court. Having IP background shows that she's well rounded.
Responded on September 21, 2009 9:15 PM
Irricurgy
Hello! Base klooper for my english jer, buti danged nice re say gJ$)Kd!!!.
Responded on September 19, 2009 10:04 PM
Thomas Bateman 3
Trying to get a grasp on this article. So she said it was ok for the groups to use the freelancers text and media, but it was reversed by the higher ups. Now that she's higher up her decisions hold much more weight and would obviously lean towards her first decision. Right now my client who has websites is going after another site for similar issues. His site talks about ghillie suits and is just indexed and copied by others.
Responded on August 21, 2009 9:11 AM
jessy web
strange.I never came across this report.and as it is did not know this incident.but anyways better late than never.thanks for the information
Responded on July 30, 2009 4:28 PM
shea
You're probably not learning this here: on Tuesday, President Obama nominated US Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court. What you might not have heard/read is that Judge Sotomayor has a background in intellectual property litigation cheap web hosting -- as an associate and partner at the Manhattan law firm Pavia & Harcourt and as a judge on the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. As a district court judge in 1997, Judge Sotomayor heard a case brought by a group of freelance journalists who claimed various news outlets including the New York Times and Time violated copyright laws by reproducing their work on electronic databases and archives such as Lexis-Nexis without first obtaining their permission. Judge Sotomayor ruled against the freelancers, arguing that the publishers were within their rights under the Copyright Act. The appeals court reversed Sotomayor's decision, siding with the freelancers and domain name registration, and the Supreme Court upheld the appellate ruling 7-2.
Responded on May 28, 2009 4:48 AM
Dave R.
I would remind people that two of President Obama's top nominees to the Justice Dept. were lead lawyers for the RIAA. Sotomayor will certainly not be a friend to people opposed to the RIAA and strongarm tactics. The Court with Sotomayor on board will be just that much more likely to back Draconian measures against the Jammie Thomases of the world.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, so I don't want to say President Obama has a "secret agenda" on this point. Let's just say he has an agenda that he doesn't like to talk about in public much. Liberal he may be on other issues -- but in terms of RIAA-type hounding, he's arguably worse than George W Bush.
Responded on May 27, 2009 4:43 PM
Joe B.
Ms. Sotomayor will most likely act as an engaged and considerate individual on the nation's high court. Her record on and off the bench is spirted, clear and consistant. She will not be a stealth rubber stamp who keeps a low profile in every measure but voting. Most importantly, her presence, in due course, will help to highlight the defects of the less qualified and less considerate members of this engineered and imbalanced court. A court that is directionally activist and predictably partisan. A court that acts as a feckless, enabling and illiberal force in our faulty democracy and failing republic.
Responded on May 27, 2009 1:53 PM
John Thacker
<i>Especially since she was a George H. Bush appointee. </i>
This is superfluous. She was Senator Moynihan's choice for the district court. As you know, Senatorial privilege means that senators have an effective veto over district court nominations for their state. As a result of this practice, there accumulated seven vacancies in New York district courts. GHWB, and Sens. Moynihan and D'Amato reached a compromise whereby each would get several picks for the bench. Sotomayor was one of Moynihan's picks. It does mean something that Bush was willing to nominate her as part of the compromise, but not nearly as much as Chris Ronk implies.
On the IP subject, it's difficult to discuss. On the one hand, you can view her decision as an anti-IP one. OTOH, it was also definitely a case of ruling in favor of Big Business and against the little guy, the freelancer. If we're going to have IP, surely the freelancer's IP should be as respected as the big guys'
Responded on May 27, 2009 1:52 PM
John Thacker
Especially since she was a George H. Bush appointee.
This is superfluous.
She was Senator Moynihan's choice for the district court. As you know, Senatorial privilege means that senators have an effective veto over district court nominations for their state. As a result of this practice, there accumulated seven vacancies in New York district courts. GHWB, and Sens. Moynihan and D'Amato reached a compromise whereby each would get several picks for the bench. Sotomayor was one of Moynihan's picks. It does mean something that Bush was willing to nominate her as part of the compromise, but not nearly as much as Chris Ronk implies.
Responded on May 26, 2009 5:01 PM
Steve R.
What does her "background" in so-called intellectual property really mean? Will she be someone who will finally restore some sanity to copyright as a LIMITED privilege, or will she simply acquiesce to the likes of the RIAA or the MPAA and give them whatever they want at the expense of the American people.
Responded on May 26, 2009 2:05 PM
Chris Ronk
Regardless of what you think, she is fantastic choice for the supreme court. She is tremendously experienced and has worked very hard to get where she is. We need a voice for everyone in our upper courts.
I imagine there will be a lot of mudslinging from Republicans, but they will do so at their own peril. Especially since she was a George H. Bush appointee.