DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Kanagaroo Kort
  HTML https://kangarookort.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Property
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 9--------------------------------------------------
       International News Society v. Associated Press
       By: kangaroo Date: January 26, 2011, 6:06 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FACTS: The International News Society (INS) and the Associated
       Press (AP) are competitors in the gathering and distribution of
       news across the United States.  AP alleged that INS gained
       access to the APs unpublished news through bribery, news
       bulletin boards and early editions.  After obtaining AP’s news
       stories, INS rewrote the stories and sold them as their own.
       Thread 1: Property
       -
       PROPERTY
       -
       really going to work in the real world…how are we going to keep
       the public from fresh news?/the property restriction would be a
       real burden on society) NOT PROPERTY UNDER THE COMMON LAW
       -
       laws to include fresh news as property
       Thread 2: Unfair competition
       -
       believe the INS has engaged in unfair competition/INS interfered
       with the completion of the business cycle w/ AP so AP did not
       get the normal return on its investment)
       -
       the business world and bona-fide competition (competition is
       good for society)
       PROCEDURAL FACTS: The District Court granted a preliminary
       injunction on the count of bribery and inducement of AP
       employees to violate company by-laws in order for INS to obtain
       news before publication.  The court refused to refused to place
       an injunction under the use of AP bulletin boards and early
       editions of news stating that the allowance of an injunction
       should wait the outcome of an appeal.
       The Court of appeals modified and sustained (leaves in tact)
       the injunction.
       The Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the decree of
       the Court of Appeals
       ISSUE: Is one company entitled to use versions of a competing
       company’s product to sell to their own customers, or do these
       actions equate to unfair business competition?
       Does a business have any property right in fresh news?
       RULE: If a company has a quasi-property interest in what it
       produces, it has the right to prevent a competitor from taking
       it.
       ANALYSIS:
       -
       business and violated AP’s property rights by using news that
       was not originally its own for sale and profit.
       -
       did not keep the news confidential and it was uncopyrighted.
       Once the news was printed or placed on the bulletin board,
       because it was uncopyrighted, that right to property was
       forfeited.
       -
       the news that it produced, it had the right to prevent INS from
       taking it and using it for its own benefit
       CONSLUSION: The actions of INS can be considered to be in
       violation with AP’s quasi-property rights and therefore, the
       injunction is affirmed.
       *****************************************************