"For Statute of Limitations purposes, the first publication is the important date. It does not get extended each time there is a republication."
YOU AND THE LAW
| Attorney Joel L. Hecker lectures and writes extensively on issues of concern to the photography industry. His office is located at Russo & Burke, 600 Third Ave, New York NY 10016. Phone: 1 212 557-9600. |
|
New York Upholds Single Publication Rule for Website Use
The established law in defamation cases, as well as copyright infringement situations, is that the initial publication of a work constitutes a single publication even though the work remains available to read or be seen at a later date. The traditional examples of this doctrine are reuse of books in a library, or magazine or newspaper articles (or photographs) which are sold over the period of their shelf life. In each of these instances, under traditional law, for Statute of Limitations purposes, the first publication is the important date. It does not get extended each time there is a republication.
The New York Court of Appeals, the highest court in New York, has now extended this doctrine to the Internet. The case, Firth v. State of New York, involved a harsh criticism in a report by the State Inspector General of an environmental police officer. The report was released at a press conference and posted on the State's website. The website was modified from time to time over the next 15 months, but this report remained unchanged.
Since the Statute of Limitations in a defamation action is 12 months, and the plaintiff did not commence the action until 15 months had passed, the Trial Court dismissed the suit.
A FIRST OCCASION
The Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal, while addressing "the first occasion for us to determine how our defamation jurisprudence, developed with traditional mass media communications, applies to communications - in a new cyberspace- in the modern Information Age."
The Court described the "chilling effect" and adverse practical consequences a different ruling would have on modern commerce: "a multiple-publication rule would implicate an even greater potential for endless retriggering of the statute of limitations, multiplicity of suits and harassment of defendants." The Court concluded that, "Inevitably there would be a serious inhibitory effect on the open, pervasive dissemination of information and ideas over the Internet, which is, of course, its greatest beneficial promise."
The Court dismissed, on public policy grounds, objections that the website was altered on a regular basis, since the alterations concerned information unrelated to the report.
The Court did not rule on whether any alterations to the alleged offending material would trigger a republication. That decision is left for another case on another day.
The theory of the decision would seem to apply equally to copyright infringement of photographs.
Of course, the opinion is binding law only in New York. However, New York Court of Appeals decisions are traditionally influential.
For More You And the Law
| |
