Contract cases and legal precedents

Contract Law: Contract Law

Marx et. al. v. The Globe Newspaper Co.

Full article available on the web at http://www.nwu.org/journ/glob0006.htm

The case -- article summary, facts, and overview

They want us to labor in "sweatshops in cyberspace," alleged Elizabeth Bunn of the Boston Globe.

Bunn was director of a writer union's Technical, Office and Professional Department and spoke regarding the 2000 dispute between freelance writers, illustrators, and photographers of the Boston Globe and the newspaper's editorial staff. The union representing the freelancers of the Globe began the court case of Marx et. al. v. The Globe Newspaper Co. In 2000. They filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of these one thousand freelancers.

The union sought an injunction in Massachusetts Superior Court against the Globe's unfair and deceptive trade and union negotiating practices regarding a contract between the freelancers and the newspaper. "The lawsuit was filed after the Globe attempted to coerce writers, illustrators and photographers into signing an unfair contract." The contract demanded that the newspaper retain all rights in all mediums "to all past, present, and future creative works by freelance contributors." The Globe informed freelancers that "they would never be hired again unless they agreed to the paper's demands, which include granting the Globe rights to re-publish in all mediums" including the Internet, all of the "articles, photographs and illustrations that were previously sold to the paper, for no additional compensation." (NWU, 2000)

The precedent action referenced the Boston Globe case by the union was "Tasini vs. The New York Times." This case established that "work contributed by freelancers cannot be re-used, electronically or by other means, by a publisher without the consent of the creator. The Times and other publishers, including the Globe, now face uncertain financial liabilities because they routinely violated copyright law by re-selling electronic versions of articles contributed by freelancers without their consent." (NWU, 2000)

Opinion of Decision

According to the 'parent case,' "Tasini vs. The New York Times," filed in December of 1993, the court of the Southern District of the State of New York noted that the case raised "questions that, to the best of plaintiffs' [Tasini's] knowledge, have not yet been specifically addressed and/or definitively answered by any court of law, e.g.: Who owns the electronic rights to articles freelance authors have written? The authors themselves? Their publishers in the print media? Electronic and/or CD-ROM Database producers that have purported to buy those rights from the companies responsible for printing them in the first place? The database services that thereafter transmit broadcast or sell the articles in their new electronic incarnation? Or, the end-user or consumer who pays for the privilege of viewing the articles on-screen, sitting at his or her computer terminal?" By deciding in favor of Tasini, the plaintiff, the N.Y. Southern District Court set a precedent that authors, rather than the newspaper, own rights to their work. In other words, the newspaper cannot enjoy an addition profit from the authors' work by disseminating it through electronic means unless it obtains the author's explicit consent and release of his or her rights before the fact.