Washington & Lee journalism ethics professor Edward Wasserman writes in the Miami Herald about the tricky question of who owns news after it’s been reported, using the recent court case between Briefing.com and Dow Jones & Co., the parent of Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal, as his news peg.
Wasserman writes, “But in the Internet age, news originators have a big problem. Within minutes of its first appearance even an exclusive news story would appear on dozens of sites that did nothing to produce it. Thanks to the speed and efficiency of search engines, the vast majority of readers will catch up with the story somewhere else, and the originating news organization won’t profit from its enterprise through higher audience numbers on its own site.
“That’s why it’s important that earlier this month a financial news website called Briefing.com paid an undisclosed sum to settle a suit brought by Dow Jones & Co., the worldwide business news powerhouse. Dow Jones sued in April to stop the Chicago-based website from helping itself to breaking news off the Dow newswire. During two weeks in February, Briefing.com allegedly copied 72 headlines and parts of 107 articles within minutes of their appearance on the Dow wire, according to a Reuters report.
“Now, what’s most notable about this case is that Dow Jones didn’t just allege copyright infringement. Copyright prohibits stealing somebody else’s words. It protects expression, not ideas. If Dow broke a story, copyright alone wouldn’t stop another website from rewriting that story and posting it.
“But Dow sued under another principle as well, the notion of ‘hot news.’ This is a somewhat vague doctrine that dates from a 1918 Supreme Court decision upholding a news service’s right to claim breaking news as ‘quasi property,’ according to an analysis in the University of Minnesota’s Silha Bulletin. That means the authors who broke the news could claim an exclusive right to the information itself, at least for a time.”
OLD Media Moves
Who "owns" business news?
November 23, 2010
Posted by Chris Roush
Washington & Lee journalism ethics professor Edward Wasserman writes in the Miami Herald about the tricky question of who owns news after it’s been reported, using the recent court case between Briefing.com and Dow Jones & Co., the parent of Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal, as his news peg.
“That’s why it’s important that earlier this month a financial news website called Briefing.com paid an undisclosed sum to settle a suit brought by Dow Jones & Co., the worldwide business news powerhouse. Dow Jones sued in April to stop the Chicago-based website from helping itself to breaking news off the Dow newswire. During two weeks in February, Briefing.com allegedly copied 72 headlines and parts of 107 articles within minutes of their appearance on the Dow wire, according to a Reuters report.
“Now, what’s most notable about this case is that Dow Jones didn’t just allege copyright infringement. Copyright prohibits stealing somebody else’s words. It protects expression, not ideas. If Dow broke a story, copyright alone wouldn’t stop another website from rewriting that story and posting it.
“But Dow sued under another principle as well, the notion of ‘hot news.’ This is a somewhat vague doctrine that dates from a 1918 Supreme Court decision upholding a news service’s right to claim breaking news as ‘quasi property,’ according to an analysis in the University of Minnesota’s Silha Bulletin. That means the authors who broke the news could claim an exclusive right to the information itself, at least for a time.”
Read more here.
Media News
The evolution of the WSJ beyond finance
November 14, 2024
Full-Time
Silicon Valley Biz Journal seeks a reporter
November 14, 2024
Media News
Economist’s Bennet, WSJ’s Morrow receive awards
November 14, 2024
Media News
WSJ is testing AI-generated article summaries
November 14, 2024
Media News
Cohen joining Bloomberg Tax
November 14, 2024
Subscribe to TBN
Receive updates about new stories in the industry daily or weekly.