Newspaper Licensing Agency - is this a scam?
Roy Hills
Agency) for some time demanding that I purchase a license for copying
newspaper articles. The phone calls are quite abrasive in tone, with
typical comments being "we know that you've been copying for some
time" and "you must pay for a license, and you'll need to pay damages
as well".
I subscribe to a press cuttings service, which sends me cuttings that
mention my company name. Typically these are from trade magazines,
but very, very occasionally they are from newspapers.
My question is: is this a scam? My reasons for wondering is that the
phone calls continue, but there is never any escalation, direct threat
of action, or solicitor's letter; it's just "you must pay, do it now".
Also, as I don't publish the press cuttings, or even distribute them
within the office, and they are all about my own company, would this
not constiture fair use?
The final bit that I find suspicious is that the licensing form
includes a section "indemnity for past copying", where you must either
pay extra to cover past copying, or provide evidence that you have not
done so. The text also says "most organisations will require
indemnity". It looks like just another way to get more money.
All in all, it has all the hallmarks of a scam to me. Does anyone
have any experience with these people, or pointers to the applicable
copyright law?
Sharky
http://www.nla.co.uk/
Begs the qustion do the calls actually COME from them or is it some
scammers using their name.
Cynic
wrote:
IANAL. IIUC, you do indeed need to pay a fee if you wish to
distribute press cuttings. This includes pinning up a cutting on the
company's notice board - though I should think that would be
considered too trivial to pursue. ISTM that it is aimed more at the
person who makes loads of copies of an article for distribution - e.g.
to include with a mailshot etc.
You do *not* need to pay for keeping copies of cuttings that are not
republished AFAIK.
The organisation you describe comes across to me as being similar to
FAST, in that they are attempting to extract money from you by what
amounts to blackmail. I suspect that they got your name froim the
cuttings agency (possibly even affiliated to them), and are making
threats as a matter of course on the assumption that you are copying
and distributing at least some of the cuttings you are sent.
If anyone is behaving unlawfully in that respect, I should think it
would be the company that sends you the cuttings.
I would either ignore the calls altogether, or, if you have time on
your hands, you could possibly record a few of the calls so as to have
evidence - or maybe ask them to confirm their demands in writing, and
then see if you can get the police interested in pursuing a case of
harrassment or even attempting to obtain money by threats.
If you are running a business, it is likely that the time needed to
take the matter further would not be available.
--
Cynic
Alex Heney
wrote:
>I've been getting phone calls from the NLA (Newspaper Licensing
>Agency) for some time demanding that I purchase a license for copying
>newspaper articles. The phone calls are quite abrasive in tone, with
>typical comments being "we know that you've been copying for some
>time" and "you must pay for a license, and you'll need to pay damages
>as well".
>
>I subscribe to a press cuttings service, which sends me cuttings that
>mention my company name. Typically these are from trade magazines,
>but very, very occasionally they are from newspapers.
>
>My question is: is this a scam? My reasons for wondering is that the
>phone calls continue, but there is never any escalation, direct threat
>of action, or solicitor's letter; it's just "you must pay, do it now".
>
Of course it is a scam.
If there *is* any requirement at all for a license to copy newspaper
articles, it would be the cuttings service that would have to pay it,
not you.
If they suspect that you are unlawfully copying them yourself, then it
is up to them to prove it in court, when they sue you for copyright
infringement.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
It's not an optical illusion. It just looks like one.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
Cynic
>Very strange, they seem to be legitimate:
>http://www.nla.co.uk/
Yes, so is F.A.S.T. Doesn't mean that they are not using some *very*
iffy tactics. OTOH it is no different to the tactics employed against
people who do not have a TV licence.
--
Cynic
martin
> I've been getting phone calls from the NLA (Newspaper Licensing
> Agency) for some time demanding that I purchase a license for copying
> newspaper articles. The phone calls are quite abrasive in tone, with
> typical comments being "we know that you've been copying for some
> time" and "you must pay for a license, and you'll need to pay damages
> as well".
sounds like FAST :~
ABC
"Roy Hills" <royh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a76kt15u15mi7gumh...@4ax.com...
of news articles (from newspapers etc), then I would assume that they have
been granted permission by the newspapers to copy their articles. If it is a
paid service, then you have paid for the privilege of receiving copied
articles.
What I would do, is the next time they call, ask then for their name and
then call them though the switchboard number which appears on their website.
This will show if they are trying to use the NLA name for scamming purposes.
Also, it is interesting to note that their website uses links which do not
point to the www.nla.co.uk site but uses a website called www.ecomallbiz.com
(which is registered to Netopia (a well known IT networking company)
Alec McKenzie
> IANAL. IIUC, you do indeed need to pay a fee if you wish to
> distribute press cuttings. This includes pinning up a cutting on the
> company's notice board - though I should think that would be
> considered too trivial to pursue. ISTM that it is aimed more at the
> person who makes loads of copies of an article for distribution - e.g.
> to include with a mailshot etc.
>
> You do *not* need to pay for keeping copies of cuttings that are not
> republished AFAIK.
Is there some misunderstanding here? The nla.co.uk website
refers to:
> rights to photocopy/fax and digitally copy and transmit cuttings for internal
> use
so it is talking about *copying* cuttings.
The OP, on the other hand, has said
> I subscribe to a press cuttings service, which sends me cuttings that
> mention my company name. Typically these are from trade magazines,
> but very, very occasionally they are from newspapers.
which refers to *sending* cuttings, which presumably have been
cut from newspapers and magazines already paid for, and there is
no copying involved.
--
Alec McKenzie
un2312....@xoxy.net
Sharky
Use the format http://www.ecomallbiz.com/easyXX where XX is any number.
They haven't got much imagination, as every site uses a very similar
layout ;-)
Mostly seem to be golf courses.
Cynic
wrote:
>The OP, on the other hand, has said
>
>> I subscribe to a press cuttings service, which sends me cuttings that
>> mention my company name. Typically these are from trade magazines,
>> but very, very occasionally they are from newspapers.
>
>which refers to *sending* cuttings, which presumably have been
>cut from newspapers and magazines already paid for, and there is
>no copying involved.
I should *think* that a "cuttings" company would in fact copy the
article to send to its client rather than physically cut the article
from a magazine or newspaper. Put yourself in the position of a
"cuttings" company, and you'll see why that would be the preferred way
to do things.
But even if the articles were copied, it would be the "cuttings"
company that are infringing copyright, not their client.
--
Cynic
Theo_D...@yahoo.co.uk
> I've been getting phone calls from the NLA (Newspaper Licensing
> Agency) for some time demanding that I purchase a license for copying
> newspaper articles. The phone calls are quite abrasive in tone, with
> typical comments being "we know that you've been copying for some
> time" and "you must pay for a license, and you'll need to pay damages
> as well".
Report them as possible blackmailers and for a
possible violation of the Telecommunications Act
which makes it an imprisonable offence to use the
public telephone network to send any mesaage
that is threatening or menacing.
> I subscribe to a press cuttings service, which sends me cuttings that
> mention my company name. Typically these are from trade magazines,
> but very, very occasionally they are from newspapers.
> My question is: is this a scam?
Also inform the cuttings service, as the NLA
(which could also be the Neasden Liberarion Army
rather than the Popular Front for the Liberation of
Neasden, who are widely regarded as mere splitters)
seem intend in running their own cuttings service.
http://www.ecomallbiz.com/easy23/introduction/
They seem to be taking a long time setting this up;
perhaps they are finding it difficult to obtain the
requisite licences?
If you have been, were there squares of newspaper on a hook?
--
x
/|\
Roy Hills
wrote:
>I should *think* that a "cuttings" company would in fact copy the
>article to send to its client rather than physically cut the article
>from a magazine or newspaper. Put yourself in the position of a
>"cuttings" company, and you'll see why that would be the preferred way
>to do things.
The "cuttings" are, of course, in digital format, not physical
cuttings. We receive an email with a URL, which points to a PDF file.
>But even if the articles were copied, it would be the "cuttings"
>company that are infringing copyright, not their client.
I guess that the cuttings company are probably already paying,
although I don't really care because that is there problem not mine.
Roy
ABC
<Theo_D...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1138373243.7...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
http://www.prweek.com/uk/search/article/534216/dti-slams-eclips-cuttings-service/
and
http://www.prweek.com/uk/search/article/528155/cipr-lobby-nla-replacement/
Mike Harrison
What are the usage terms of the company that supplies you with the cuttings ?
Steve Pearce
>ABC wrote:
>And if your bored for 5 mins check some of their other hosted pages.
>Use the format http://www.ecomallbiz.com/easyXX where XX is any number.
>They haven't got much imagination, as every site uses a very similar
>layout ;-)
>Mostly seem to be golf courses.
>
My favourite was Grimbsy Sheet Metal...
Peter
>
> Of course it is a scam.
>
> If there *is* any requirement at all for a license to copy newspaper
> articles, it would be the cuttings service that would have to pay it,
> not you.
AFAIK it is possible a person who 'uses' works in breach of copyright, the
copyright holder can aim for who (s)he thinks is the softer and deeper
pocketed target. Any contract terms between clipping service and user are
of no concern to the copyright holder with respect as whom should be sued.
>
> If they suspect that you are unlawfully copying them yourself, then it
> is up to them to prove it in court, when they sue you for copyright
> infringement.
If they are taking civil action under copyright law, they only need to prove
it on the balance of probabilities, not 'beyond reasonable doubt'. The
other party does not have any 'right to silence', moreover both parties
have the right to require the other to produce relevant information (ie
'discovery').
Alex Heney
wrote:
>Alex Heney wrote:
>
>>
>> Of course it is a scam.
>>
>> If there *is* any requirement at all for a license to copy newspaper
>> articles, it would be the cuttings service that would have to pay it,
>> not you.
>
>AFAIK it is possible a person who 'uses' works in breach of copyright,
I presume you meant to include the words "to sue" there.
But you would be wrong, unless they can show that the user *knows* the
works in his possession are in breach of copyright, *and* the user is
using them in the course of business.
The only section in the Copyrights, designs and Patents Act relating
to possession is the following.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. The copyright in a work is infringed by a person who, without
the licence of the copyright owner—
(a) possesses in the course of a business,
(b) sells or lets for hire, or offers or exposes for sale or hire,
(c) in the course of a business exhibits in public or distributes, or
(d) distributes otherwise than in the course of a business to such an
extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the copyright,
an article which is, and which he knows or has reason to believe is,
an infringing copy of the work.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> the
>copyright holder can aim for who (s)he thinks is the softer and deeper
>pocketed target. Any contract terms between clipping service and user are
>of no concern to the copyright holder with respect as whom should be sued.
>
Of course they are.
The copyright holder will get nowhere attempting to sue the user if
the user honestly believes they have paid for a legitimate copying
service.
>>
>> If they suspect that you are unlawfully copying them yourself, then it
>> is up to them to prove it in court, when they sue you for copyright
>> infringement.
>
>If they are taking civil action under copyright law, they only need to prove
>it on the balance of probabilities, not 'beyond reasonable doubt'. The
>other party does not have any 'right to silence', moreover both parties
>have the right to require the other to produce relevant information (ie
>'discovery').
All correct.
But the point is that they would have to prove it. Which means they
would have to have some evidence that he was further copying them.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Not a computer nerd; merely a techno-weenie.
s_pick...@yahoo.com
My thoughts exactly.
TVL: "Prove that you are innocent."
NLA: "Prove that you do not owe us any money."
Jonathan Bryce
> My question is: is this a scam? My reasons for wondering is that the
> phone calls continue, but there is never any escalation, direct threat
> of action, or solicitor's letter; it's just "you must pay, do it now".
The organisation that deals with this is called the Copyright Licencing
Agency, so yes, it sounds like a scam.
IanAl
When is a scam not a scam?
As others have pointed out, a lot of apparently legitimate
organisations send out threatening letters and claim powers they don't
really have, such as FAST (Federation Against Software Theft) and the
TV licensing people. For all I know the Child Support Agency and
Inland Revenue adopt dodgy tactics. It's just a matter of degree.
Lea Davies
news:oeita3-...@michelle.jbryce...
No. The Newspaper Licensing Agency does exist. See Newspaper Licensing
Agency Ltd v Marks and Spencer Plc [2001] UKHL 38. This is a case that the
NLA lost when Marks made copies of articles for internal distribution. Like
Roy, they subscribed to the press cuttings service. It looks as though if
you subscribe to the press cuttings service, you automatically join the
NLA's harassment list - probably because they assume that if you subscribe
to the PCS then you're going to make copies of the articles at some stage.
The case actually centered on the definition of 'published edition' as it
related to the typographical arrangements of articles under the CDPA 1988.
Roy, if you want a copy of the full judgement then I'd be happy to email it
to you.
Roy Hills
wrote:
>What are the usage terms of the company that supplies you with the cuttings ?
I phoned them, and they said that it is my responsibility to abide by
any copyright restrictions.
So they are saying that it's not their problem, which seems quite
reasonable to me.
Roy Hills
<notfors...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>No. The Newspaper Licensing Agency does exist. See Newspaper Licensing
>Agency Ltd v Marks and Spencer Plc [2001] UKHL 38. This is a case that the
>NLA lost when Marks made copies of articles for internal distribution. Like
>Roy, they subscribed to the press cuttings service. It looks as though if
>you subscribe to the press cuttings service, you automatically join the
>NLA's harassment list - probably because they assume that if you subscribe
>to the PCS then you're going to make copies of the articles at some stage.
>The case actually centered on the definition of 'published edition' as it
>related to the typographical arrangements of articles under the CDPA 1988.
>
>Roy, if you want a copy of the full judgement then I'd be happy to email it
>to you.
Thanks for the pointer. I've found a copy of the judgement online at
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200102/ldjudgmt/jd010712/news-1.htm
Based on this, and the fact that I'm not even distributing internally
(just keeping a single copy for my own use), I'm pretty sure that the
NLA's threats are unenforceable.
Alex Heney
wrote:
>On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 16:09:32 GMT, Mike Harrison <mi...@whitewing.co.uk>
>wrote:
>>What are the usage terms of the company that supplies you with the cuttings ?
>
>I phoned them, and they said that it is my responsibility to abide by
>any copyright restrictions.
>
Only in regard to what you do with what they send you.
It is their responsibility to abide by any copyright restrictions when
creating the copy they send to you.
>So they are saying that it's not their problem, which seems quite
>reasonable to me.
But wrong.
If you decide to print out copies of the "cuttings" and post them up
on every noticeboard in the office, or distribute them to every
person, then that is not their problem, agreed. That would be your
responsibility.
But whether the copies they send you are in breach of copyright is
*entirely* their problem.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Sometimes the best defense is a skillful surrender.
David
Just a thought on the matter. Why do the press need the NLA and the PCS when
it seems that as soon as you register with the PCS it's assumed that you
will make copies. Why can't they just put the two together through a single
agency and offer the license as an automatic part of the PCS?
Seems a little bizarre to me.