June 10, 2002
9:25 AM   Subscribe

NY Times "reprint" fees I've searched recent MeFi threads and found no mention of this, so I hope this is not a duplicate posting. Sometime in May, the New York Times seems to have modified its "email, print friendly" box to include an icon for reprint permissions. It seems to be on every NYT-originated story. See in upper right corner of this example. Click and follow and you soon see that the NYT wants $150 for permission to "republish" one of its stories on the web for informational purposes only. Sounds like the company wants to charge for linking to their stories. Am I wrong? Is posting a link on the web legally the same as "republishing?" Is this another facet of the "deep-linking" controversy? Is this being enforced? Since the NYT still offers the "email to a friend" feature, it must not apply to sharing a single story with another individual. Thanks.
posted by tnadeau (11 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason:

You're wrong. If it meant linking it would have said linking. This means publishing the full text of the story, and keeping it online forever. And this is why it's not allowed. (I work for an online paper; we have a similar policy. Links are fine, but we warn folks that if the link expires, they should probably stop using it.)
posted by krewson at 9:29 AM on June 10, 2002

I agree with krewson's take. Any lawyers want to clarify? And being able to republish a full article on the web for $150 seems to me a very reasonable fee. I'll have to drum up some venture capital and put together www.jennifersteainhauer.com, a republishing of only her work.
posted by djacobs at 9:34 AM on June 10, 2002

I assume this is for instances where (for example) a company wants to integrate the full text of a story in which it's highlighted into the hierarchy of its own site, rather than provide an outbound link.
posted by todds at 9:54 AM on June 10, 2002

Direct link to the 'sales' page. There are two formats available: "Reprints" and "Permissions". As the reprints estimate includes a selection for type and size of paper, which can also be stapled or three-hole punched, they seem to be discussing actually printing the article using traditional means. Under permissions, there are a variety of possible formats: in e-mail "for business purposes", in print, and for either informational or promotional web use. Only the last two seem to pertain to the people who solve the problem of an article falling into the paid archives by putting a samizdat version on their own site; only the first covers e-mail at all, and it's very explicit about commercial use being the factor.

This is through the service copyright.com, which has been written up elsewhere -- and I'm sure I've seen this in more mainstream pubs -- for over a year. Several customers of the service seem to have gone live on May 20, 2002.

Poorly researched, poorly formatted FPP. Please do better next time. This isn't "Ask Metafilter".
posted by dhartung at 10:24 AM on June 10, 2002

I checked out the form and there is a charge for republishing the text of a NYTimes article on a website -- for business or informational purposes.

So to answer the question posed at the top -- no, they don't want to charge for linking, and if they had a problem with deep-linking, they would redirect users. But I am surprised that they charge so much for quoting an excerpt on the web, even if it's for a personal/non-profit site.
posted by jennak at 10:37 AM on June 10, 2002

Oh look, Dan slammed a post in an inappropriate area of the site by using MetaFilter instead of MetaTalk. Good thing he doesn't have other bad habits, like using "FPP."

Oh, wait, my bad.
posted by NortonDC at 11:02 AM on June 10, 2002

Please do better next time.

Holy crap.
posted by drinkcoffee at 12:12 PM on June 10, 2002

first: I work for NYT now and used to work for www.nytimes.com, but I DON'T SPEAK FOR THEM. It's Important for me to make that disclaimer.

This is the way it has always been. They are merely offering a service online that was always available for the paper. This cost is for getting permission to reprint a Times article, literally. If your restaurant was written up and you want to hang it on the wall or if your company was mantioned and you want to put it in the annual report, you negotiate a reprint charge.

Now, for the web it looks like if you want to post Times text on your site, not link to it you have to pay a fee, just like you always have. The website has a rights bulldog who tracks down illegal posting of Times content and forces a payment, and this isn't at all unusual. They are merely offering a service through the website that would have required phonecalls and faxing previously.
posted by n9 at 12:17 PM on June 10, 2002

Everyone is allowed to celebrate Sanctimonious Day in whatever way they want. Even Dhartung.
posted by crunchland at 12:34 PM on June 10, 2002

Grrrrr.. Metatalk... grrrrr...
posted by PrinceValium at 2:08 PM on June 10, 2002

Oh, what a lovely new meme THIS is! Let's all be sure to use it as liberally and widely as possible!
posted by rushmc at 2:12 PM on June 10, 2002

« Older   |   Yahoo!'s new front page Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments