Freelance writers retain control of both print and electronic rights as separate issues

June 25, 2001 - Just because you sold a print publication one of your articles, does not give the publication the right to automatically reproduce that article in electronic form without your express consent. That was the ruling of the Supreme Court in a 7-2 decision handed down today.

Whether the electronic form is an electronic database or the Internet, media companies must get your permission to post your work. The case first went to trial with New York Times v. Tasini, in which the Court had to decide if electronic reproduction of a newspaper or periodical constituted a revision of the original print edition, earlier defined as the late evening edition of a newspaper or material placed on microfilm for archival purposes.

The net result is that publishers are now obligated to remove any material from electronic view to which they do not have the writer's express consent or have successfully negotiated new permissions and/or fees. The case is said to largely affect articles, photographs and illustrations produced 10 years ago, when contracts contained no clauses in regard to electronic use.

This ruling in essence gives freelance writers the clout they need to negotiate a contract and understand exactly how their article is to be used and where.

Tasini v. New York Times involved six freelance writers who sued The New York Times, Newsday, Time Magazine Inc., Lexis/Nexis and University Microfilms International over use of their work in electronic databases.