Decisions of the court

We conclude that the unauthorized use of the Greenberg photographs in the CNG compiled and authored by the Society constitutes copyright infringement that is not excused by the privilege afforded the Society

We also find that the unauthorized use of Greenberg's diver photograph in the derivative and collective work, the Sequence, compiled by the Society, constitutes copyright infringement, and that the proffered de minimis use defense is without merit.

http://www.internetlibrary.com/cases/lib_case504.cfm

The district court agreed with National Geographic, and dismissed plaintiff’s suit. In its initial decision in this case, the 11th Circuit disagreed, holding that this work constituted a new product “in a new medium, for a new market that far transcends any privilege of revision or other mere reproduction envisioned in section 201(c).” In its initial decision, the 11th Circuit accordingly rejected defendants’ defense that its conducted was protected by 201(c).

Subsequent to this decision, the Supreme Court decided New York Times Co. v. Tasini, in which the Court held that under Section 201(c) the Times could not republish articles that had appeared in its newspapers in an electronic database which permitted them to be separated from the context – the newspaper – in which they originally appeared without the permission of their authors. The Court held that including these articles in such electronic databases was not a permitted revision of the collective work in which they originally appeared, and was thus not protected by the New York Times’ copyright therein.

Following Tasini, the Second Circuit, in Faulkner, decided that the National Geographic’s republication of its magazines in the Complete National Geographic cd-rom set was indeed a revision protected by 201(c), and dismissed a copyright infringement suit brought, like the case at bar, by the holder of a copyright of photos contained in those magazines.

In light of these decisions, the 11th Circuit reversed it prior decision, and held that the Complete National Geographic was indeed a permitted revision of the original magazines protected by application of Section 201(c). As explained by the 11th Circuit, the central question was “whether the original context of the collective work has been preserved in the revision.” Because such was the case here, as the cd-roms contained 1200 National Geographic magazines exactly as they had originally been published, this was a revision protected by 201(c). This was true notwithstanding the fact that the cd-roms also included a new 25 second video montage of the covers of 10 of the magazines contained in the cd-rom set. Said the Court:

http://www.internetlibrary.com/cases/lib_case504.cfm

These are the decisions of the courts. I find that the courts decisions are appropriate. There is many corporations, that take advantage of free-lance artist. This is one war that artist weather photographer or painter or even a chef, need to be able to protect their work.