How The Generative AI Boom Proves We Need Journalism

Danielle Coffey, CEO and president of the News/Media Alliance, believes journalism and generative AI can play nice.

But first, generative AI companies must get real about the value journalism brings to their products.

“This doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game,” Coffey told AdExchanger. “These innovative technologies are very promising, but it doesn’t have to be at the expense of journalism.”

AI companies acknowledge the value of journalism, Coffey said… So, she argued, they should look at working with journalists as part of the cost of doing business – similar to how Netflix or Spotify compensate content creators for their IP.

Click here to read the rest of the Q&A on AdExchanger‘s website.

Related:

News/Media Alliance Artificial Intelligence articles

Alliance CEO Op-Ed: Can AI companies and media publishers work together?

AI White Paper: How the Pervasive Copying of Expressive Works to Train and Fuel Generative Artificial Intelligence Systems Is Copyright Infringement And Not a Fair Use

AI Principles

The post Alliance CEO Q&A: How The Generative AI Boom Proves We Need Journalism appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

The briefing discusses why these provisions are not applicable to the Online News Act in the first place and how, even if they were applicable, the bill would not be in violation of the relevant prohibitions. It also emphasizes the vital public welfare rationale behind the Act – and others, including the News Media Bargaining Code and the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act in the United States – and how this aligns with the Biden Administration’s all-of-government competition initiative. The briefing calls for the USTR to restrain from expressing reservations on the Act, noting that doing so would undermine similar efforts in the United States. Read the full briefing here.

The post News/Media Alliance Rebuts Arguments That Canada’s Online News Act Violates Treaty Obligations appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

Rawpixel Ltd / iStock/Getty Images Plus via Getty Images

The below Q&A is from an interview with News/Media Alliance Executive Vice President & General Counsel, Danielle Coffey, published in the February 2023 edition of Editor & Publisher Magazine. The original article is available here.

Q: In what ways have copyright laws and compliance become more complicated in the digital, social media age?

A: There are two sides to this question. First, digital transformation has led to a proliferation in the availability of news sources and content for journalists and publishers, as well as the number of middlemen that publishers have to deal with regularly. As a result, publishers must pay more attention to due diligence — ensuring that they understand the relationships between the original copyright owner and any platforms or middlemen they may use and that they have the necessary rights to any content they publish.

For example, many publishers have recently struggled with the legal uncertainty around using embedded content on Instagram without explicit authorization from the original poster. Related to this, the increased availability of photos and videos taken by amateurs during news events — especially fast-moving ones where time is of the essence — raises important questions on how to acquire the necessary licenses while remaining on top of the newsworthy situation. These conditions require publishers to pay particular attention to ensuring they comply with applicable copyright laws.

Second, the digital age has also made it more complicated for publishers to protect their content against unauthorized uses. These uses range from the overly-expansive use of news content by search and social media platforms, which the Alliance has advocated against at length, to the use of news content for AI training purposes, to the unlawful posting of full-text articles on services often based abroad, often within minutes of publication, threatening the original publishers’ ability to benefit from subscription and digital advertising revenues. These uses are often systematic, and the infringers are hard to detect and locate, making enforcing copyright laws difficult, time-consuming and expensive.

Q: How have U.S. copyright laws and protections been challenged in the courts in recent years? Are there particular cases that news publishers should be familiar with — or concerned about?

A: There have been a few cases in the last five years with implications for news publishers, with some of the most important being Fox News Network v. TVEyes (2018), Goldman v. Breitbart (2018), and Warhol v. Goldsmith (ongoing).

TVEyes concerned a service that copied broadcasts from over 1,400 TV and radio stations and allowed its subscribers to search, download, watch and share clips of these programs. The District Court had found that both the search function and the watch function were fair use. Fox appealed the decision as it related to the watch function, and the Circuit Court reversed, finding the fourth fair use factor — related to potential market harm — decisive. This was a key victory for rightsholders, with the Court correctly noting that the market effect on the copyright owner should be a major factor in fair use analysis and giving leverage to the argument that even the use of clips of protected content can hurt the copyright owner and should be subject to serious scrutiny.

Meanwhile, Goldman focused on publishers’ ability to embed third-party content from social media. Specifically, the defendants had embedded a tweet with the plaintiff’s photograph of Tom Brady without the original poster’s authorization. Rejecting the Ninth Circuit’s “server test,” the Second Circuit agreed with Goldman, finding that the embedding violated his exclusive rights despite the image being hosted on a third-party server. Similar questions have since arisen in other cases, often concerning Instagram — which recently introduced an option to opt-out of embedding following discussions with the News/Media Alliance — with one publisher settling a case brought by a photographer in New York and Instagram managing to squash a class-action lawsuit against itself related to its embedding function in California. This remains an important debate for publishers to follow.

Lastly, we’re also eagerly awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision on Warhol, which concerns Andy Warhol’s paintings of Prince, based on a portrait taken by photographer Lynn Goldsmith for Vanity Fair before Prince became famous. Following Prince’s death, Goldsmith discovered that Warhol had made a whole series of paintings based on the photo without her permission. The case raises important questions about what amounts to “transformative use” within fair use analysis. The Alliance submitted an amicus brief in support of neither party, outlining some of the delicate considerations the case raises, including how an overly broad definition of “transformative use” could threaten the copied work right. The Court heard oral arguments in the case this past October, with the decision due this spring.

Q: Copyright was at the heart of the news publisher v. Big Tech negotiations in Europe. Can you share a synopsis of those negotiations and where things stand in Europe? Also, help us wrap some context around what’s happened in Europe and what it may mean for news publishers here in the States.

A: The European Union’s adoption in 2019 of its Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, including Article 15, which requires member states to create a so-called “Publishers’ Right,” was a landmark development. It acknowledged the inability of publishers to effectively protect their content online against unauthorized uses by online platforms and provided publishers with an independent right to do so. In France, the first country to implement Article 15 in national law, publishers soon encountered problems negotiating with Google. In 2019, soon after the law’s adoption, Google refused to pay publishers and indicated it would stop showing excerpts in search results unless a publisher waived its right to compensation. Following a challenge by French publishers, the French competition authority issued an interim ruling, finding that Google likely engaged in anticompetitive behavior and required Google to engage in negotiations. While Google engaged in negotiations and reached some deals after the decision, the French competition watchdog issued a €500 million fine against Google a year later for failing to comply with the orders on conducting such negotiations. Following this fine, Google proposed commitments in early 2022 to change its practices and to resolve the investigation into its anticompetitive practices. The competition authority accepted Google’s commitments in June, with Google expected to negotiate with a broader selection of publishers in good faith.

From the publishers’ viewpoint in the United States, Europe established a precedent that Australia improved upon. The Alliance has embraced a model similar to Australia based on competition law, where the anticompetitive conduct and power of the monopolies are more squarely addressed. The Journalism Competition and Preservation Act, considered by Congress during the last session, would have adopted a similar approach in the U.S. to the Australian model, while Canada, the UK, and India are also considering similar approaches. All of the approaches attempt to address the disparities in the digital ecosystem that allow dominant online platforms not only to set the rules of the game but to reap the vast majority of rewards. Publishers need more leverage to negotiate fairer terms and compensation that help preserve high-quality journalism for future generations.

Q: Is the News/Media Alliance engaged in lobbying Congress for any changes to copyright law or protections granted to news publishers?

A: In comments submitted with the Copyright Office, the Alliance recommended that Congress explore a sui generis, or quasi-property right, that would recognize an exchange of value outside of the fair use factors but within copyright law. We are also actively advocating for changes that would allow publishers to register dynamic web content, which is currently impossible. This would significantly affect the publishers’ ability to register and protect their content online effectively.

Q: Who, typically or ideally, should be concerned with or tasked with copyright compliance at the news publisher?

A: This depends a lot on the type and size of the publication, with no easy one-size-fits-all answer. Some large publishers may have whole teams responsible for ensuring compliance with various laws, including copyright, while smaller outlets may rely on an individual person, such as an image editor. The most important thing is that whoever is responsible for compliance takes their job seriously, has the time and resources to do so properly, and has the authority to affect publishing decisions.

The post Q&A: Navigating Copyright Compliance Issues for News Publishers appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

On January 30, the News/Media Alliance filed comments with the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to inform their annual Special 301 Review. The Review, required by Congress pursuant to the Trade Act of 1975, highlights foreign countries, laws, policies, and practices that fail to protect and enforce intellectual property rights adequately and effectively. The Alliance’s comments were in response to and addressed arguments made by big tech stakeholders in previous years in response to various USTR proceedings, including Special 301, criticizing global efforts to level the playing field between publishers and the dominant online platforms and to require platforms to compensate publishers for the use of news content. The comments argued that not only were these policies – such as Canada’s proposed Online News Bill or Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code – outside the remit of the Special 301 Review, they are not discriminatory or in violation of international law. Instead, they are informed by an important public policy objective, shared by the United States, of protecting the sustainability of and our communities’ continued access to high-quality journalism. The comments urged the USTR to remain neutral on these policies in the Special 301 Report. Read the full comments here.

The post The Alliance Rebuts Big Tech Arguments on News Compensation Bills in Special 301 Comments appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

Photo credit: rarrarorro / iStock/Getty Images Plus via Getty Images

Also published in America’s Newspapers’ e-newsletter here. 

Following the re-introduction of the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (H.R. 1735 / S. 673) (JCPA) in 2021, the News/Media Alliance and its allies worked to advocate for the bill’s passage during the 117th Congress. The JCPA would allow small and local news publishers to come together to collectively negotiate with Google and Facebook for fair compensation for use of their content. News publishers, magazines and broadcasters currently do not have the ability to negotiate deals on their own, as the dominant tech platforms capture the majority of U.S. digital ad revenue, leaving little to reinvest in the production of high-quality journalism.

The Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on antitrust hosted a hearing for the JCPA in February of 2022, allowing for substantive conversation on the legislation, and garnering further interest from Congressional leaders. The Alliance and its allies followed up on this hearing by meeting with Congressional staffers and organizing grassroots outreach, resulting in over 2,000 touchpoints on Capitol Hill over the summer. These efforts led to a successful Senate Judiciary Committee markup on September 22, where the JCPA was reported favorably to the Senate floor with a committee vote of 15-7.

Policymakers are motivated to stand up for the vital public institution of journalism and push back against anticompetitive business practices. A thriving press performs a critical role in building and engaging local communities and holding government officials accountable. There is broad agreement in the U.S. – on both sides of the aisle, not only on the Hill but among members the public – that action is needed to protect local journalism. An April 2022 poll of 1,000 U.S. adults conducted by Schoen Cooperman Research for the News/Media Alliance found that 70 percent of Americans support Congress passing the JCPA.

In December, nine leading media and journalism organizations, including the Alliance, Americas Newspapers, National Newspaper Association, the American Economic Liberties Project, and others sent a joint letter to Congressional leaders calling on the Congress to pass the JCPA before the end of 2022. The groups underscored the importance of passing the JCPA as the best solution to ensuring news publishers are compensated fairly for use of their content by the dominant tech platforms.

Over the past few years, Australia and the European Union have witnessed the benefits of their recently enacted laws to protect journalism. The Australian model, which requires the dominant tech platforms to pay publishers for use of their original content, has prompted other countries including Canada, India and the UK to take steps towards adopting similar laws. The results in Australia have been transformative for journalism. As a result of its News Media Bargaining Code adopted in 2021, estimates suggest that the total compensation received by news publishers so far – $140 million, which translates to billions in the U.S. – would cover around 20% of the costs of Australian journalists’ salaries. In addition, Australian newspapers are recruiting more journalists, with journalism professors noting an oversupply of available positions for their students. This is despite the fact that no platform has yet been “designated” under the Code – an official determination requiring the designated platform to negotiate with eligible publishers. The mere threat of designation has resulted in successful negotiations between news publishers and the platforms and provides evidence of the value of an Australian-style model for other countries to follow.

The Alliance and its allies successfully advocated for inclusion of the JCPA in the NDAA in December, only to have it removed after Meta threatened to remove news from its platform and Republicans reversed support and demanded a “clean” bill. Threats like Meta made were attempted before the Australian government passed its Code – they were unsuccessful, and news publishers ultimately got paid. As the tech platforms compensate news publishers around the world, it demonstrates the demand and economic value for news.

In the 117th Congress, the JCPA garnered bipartisan support with 75 co-sponsors in the House and 15 in the Senate. The Alliance continues to hold conversations with the JCPA’s Congressional champions, who intend to reintroduce the bill in the 118th Congress. The congressional champions are eager to move the bill, mobilized after the momentum gained at the end of last year. The abuse of dominance by the tech platforms and threat to local journalism still exists, and leaders in Congress are still committed to fixing that problem. The Alliance remains dedicated to ensuring quality journalism prevails and intend to work alongside our allies to ensure a legislative solution moves forward in this Congress.

The post Big Tech Threat to Local Journalism Still Exists, Congress Committed to Fixing That Problem Through JCPA appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

The post News/Media Alliance Reminds USTR of the Importance of High-Quality Journalism appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

Particularly notable is the support from Australia where nearly 18 months ago, its parliament adopted legislation creating the News Media Bargaining Code, a code of conduct to address bargaining power imbalances between Australian publishers and Big Tech.

A new analysis from the News/Media Alliance states, “Like the JCPA… the Australian Code does not attempt to solve all the problems faced by news publishers in the online ecosystem. Instead, the sole purpose of both measures is to balance the playing field between publishers and online platforms, creating a more sustainable foundation for the preservation of high-quality journalism.”

The Australian media endorses U.S. efforts to pass the JCPA because they’ve seen the success of their own legislation firsthand. Thanks to the code, Facebook and Google have now paid over $140 million to qualifying publishers – publishers which employ an estimated 90-plus percent of Australian journalists. In a recent report, former Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) Chair Rod Sims confirmed the success of the News Media Bargaining Code, estimating that the compensation accrued to date amounts to approximately 20 percent of Australian journalists’ salaries and likely more than 20 percent of eligible publishers’ combined earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization.

In response to the recent progress on the JCPA, Sims stated, “I am delighted to see the JCPA advancing through the US Congress.  It will benefit US media significantly, and so will greatly strengthen the USA in so many ways.”

Similar legislation is also in the works in Canada, Europe and the United Kingdom. Canada’s Online News Act, a bill which aims to ensure fair compensation for news media, was introduced in April 2022 and, following the adoption of new laws in the European Union, publishers have had successful negotiations with Google, which signed deals to pay more than 300 publishers in May 2022. The UK is also likely to introduce new legislation in the coming months to combat Big Tech’s influence on local media by granting statutory powers to the Digital Markets Unit (DMU), its tech watchdog organization. We applaud their efforts to hold Big Tech accountable and make local news more sustainable.

As the JCPA moves forward in the U.S. Congress – the Senate text of the bill was released Monday and is on the agenda for Senate Judiciary Committee markup in September – we thank our international supporters for urging passage of the JCPA in both the Senate and House of Representatives.

###

Media Contact:
Lindsey Loving
Director, Communications
lindsey@newsmediaalliance.org

The post Statement: International Organizations Support the JCPA appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

Image credit: baona / iStock/Getty Images Plus via Getty Images

One and a half years ago, the Australian parliament adopted legislation creating the News Media Bargaining Code, a revolutionary measure aimed at protecting news publishers from the dominance of a few big online platforms.

Online platforms like Facebook and Google control the digital advertising ecosystem, collect the vast majority of ad revenues and data, and make important decisions on how and what information users see at any given time. They rely on news content to keep users on their platforms but have no incentives to pay for it – they have little regard for any single publisher, while the realities of the current digital marketplace mean that all publishers, small and large, depend on Google and Facebook to reach readers. Consequently, as the platforms are unavoidable trading partners for publishers, they hold all the leverage when it comes to defining the terms of their partnerships.

Like the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA) – a competition-based solution introduced in the U.S. Congress – the Australian Code does not attempt to solve all the problems faced by news publishers in the online ecosystem. Instead, the sole purpose of both measures is to balance the playing field between publishers and online platforms, creating a more sustainable foundation for the preservation of high-quality journalism.

Now, as the JCPA is making progress in Congress, it is a good time to evaluate the success of Australia’s Code.

How the Australian Bargaining Code Works

The News Media Bargaining Code is based on the simple idea that, in order to level the playing field between news publishers and online platforms, news publishers must be allowed to negotiate effectively – and collectively if necessary – with the platforms, backed by a binding arbitration process in case a settlement is not found. To do so, the Code allows eligible publishers that publish so-called “core” news to engage in good faith negotiations with designated online platforms – with any designation decision informed by whether the platform has made a “significant contribution to the sustainability of the Australian news industry through agreements relating to news content of Australian news businesses.”

If no settlement is reached within a set time period, news publishers are allowed to seek “final offer” arbitration where the arbitrator must select one of the two offers made by the parties. Even if arbitration is never used, its existence may force meaningful negotiations.

Prior to the Code, the platforms routinely claimed that they provide more to publishers than they get in return and refused to negotiate for fairer terms or compensation. The Code therefore lays out the basis for negotiations that would have been unimaginable without it. This in itself makes the Code a significant development that should be emulated around the world. But the real-life results provide even more compelling reasons.

The Australian Code Has Been an Overwhelming Success

Despite the numerous scare tactics employed by Google and Meta during the drafting of the News Media Bargaining Code, the evidence from the past 1.5 years shows that the Code has been an overwhelming success. Based on an estimate by the former Chair of the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission Rod Sims, the Code has resulted in over AU$200 million payments from Google and Meta to news publishers, despite neither company having yet been designated under the Code – the mere threat of designation has led both companies to engage in meaningful negotiations with publishers. Sims estimates that the compensation amounts to approximately 20 percent of Australian journalists’ salaries and likely more than 20 percent of eligible publishers’ combined earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EDITBA).

These deals have been reached with publishers large and small, despite critics arguing that only large publishers would be likely to benefit. However, this has not proved to be the case.  For example, Country Press Australia – representing approximately 180 publications and 60 news publishers –  reached a deal with both Google and Meta, and more recently, Minderoo Foundation reached a deal with Google on behalf of 24 small media outlets. As a result, Google has reached a deal with almost all qualifying news publishers, while Facebook has reached far fewer deals and even refused to negotiate with some. Some estimate that Facebook is under threat of being designated under the Code due to these refusals.

The Bargaining Code Has Been Great for Journalists

Notwithstanding arguments to the contrary, there is also evidence that the Code has led to considerable improvements for journalists, instead of enriching large publishers. Not only has The Guardian increased its newsroom employment from 70 to roughly 150 journalists, in large part due to revenue received under the Code, the Australian Broadcasting Company announced in December 2021 that it was creating more than 50 journalist positions in regional locations as a result of the Code. Overall, this is a good time to be a journalist in Australia with journalism lecturers noting increased employment for their students and an oversupply of available of positions.

It is estimated that the Australian Code has forced Google and Meta to reach deals with publishers that employ over 90 percent of Australian journalists and brought in more money than most publishers expected. As Rod Sims noted, the Code has met almost all of its objectives quicker than almost anyone expected – a policy instrument that reaches most of its objectives sooner than expected and benefits over 90 percent of its expected beneficiaries simply cannot be called a failure.

Australia has demonstrated that change is possible and that the bargaining imbalances between news publishers and the dominant online platforms can be corrected. Despite the scaremongering during the drafting process, the Code did not fundamentally alter the functioning of the free and open web or reduce media diversity. Instead, it has created a more sustainable future for high-quality journalism in Australia with significant additional resources available to newsrooms.

Congress Must Act and Pass the JCPA

It is now time for the United States to follow suit. News deserts are spreading across the United States at an alarming pace, leaving far too many communities without local newspapers. Inaction is not an option if we want to preserve these vital public institutions. The Journalism Competition and Preservation Act would likely lead to substantial payments to small, local newsrooms across America proportionally equal to what we have witnessed in Australia, providing a lifeline for publishers who most need the help. The Australian experience shows this can be done.

The post Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code Is a Major Success That the U.S. Can Emulate appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Arlington, VA – The News Media Alliance and National Newspaper Association, both long-standing newspaper advocacy organizations with Washington, D.C., area offices, have created a joint policy group to assist their members in the newspaper industry with postal issues and public policy.

NNA, founded in 1885 as Newspaper Editorial Association, will take the lead on postal issues, an area of expertise for its entire history. News Media Alliance, whose legacy organization was founded in 1887, will advise NNA on digital publishing policies, on which it has sharpened its expertise since the breakup of the Bell telephone companies in the 1990s.

As part of the agreement, the National Newspaper Association Foundation will open its postal training tools to Alliance members and NNA will assist in case-specific postal problems through its Postal Hotline.

The Alliance will continue to factor in the concerns of community newspapers in its advocacy on important industry issues like the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act, and the two groups will form an consultative task force to help the industry to speak with one voice on other critical issues, such as journalism and First Amendment advocacy. The Alliance manages the media industry’s News Media for Open Government coalition, which includes organizations that lobby for government transparency. NNA is a founding member of NMOG.

The agreement’s member-benefits offerings will take effect in January 2022, and will feature training for newspapers and publishers in the use of Periodicals mail. Growing numbers of newspaper publishers are turning to mail delivery for distribution. Advocacy consultation has already begun.

NNA Chair Brett Wesner and Alliance Executive Vice President & General Counsel Danielle Coffey said they saw this agreement as a powerful combination to create efficiency in newspaper industry advocacy and training.

“These are the two organizations that have been the voices for newspapers in Washington for more than a century, NNA representing the smaller newspapers and NMA the larger ones,” Wesner, president of Wesner Publications, Cordell, Oklahoma, said. “The demands and expenses of doing this work have accelerated in recent years and we see that this trajectory is going to continue. It seemed to both of us that we could do a better job if we eliminate duplication and amplify our voices wherever possible.”

“The News Media Alliance is pleased to partner with NNA to help amplify our voice on key shared issues of importance to our members,” Coffey said. “We look forward to collaborating with NNA to help drive important public policy results that will benefit local news publishers, as well as equip our members with resources and training to help navigate the changing postal landscape.”

While NNA and NMA will handle the public policy side, the NNA Foundation’s role will be the third leg of this innovative partnership, bringing a broad educational piece to the table.

“NNA Foundation has been accelerating its newspaper training programs all year,” NNA Foundation President Matt Adelman, publisher of the Douglas (Wyoming) Budget, said. “We have periodic webinars on all sorts of subjects. This agreement will become part of our new Max Heath Postal Institute, whose mission is to make newspapers and printers better users of the mail. NMA’s members will be eligible to join us for this training. We look forward to working together.”

The faculty for the joint training endeavors will be the Washington office and headquarters personnel for NNA and NMA, including Danielle Coffey, News Media Alliance executive vice president and general counsel; Lynne Lance, NNA executive director; Tonda Rush, NNA General Counsel; and Matthew Paxton, publisher of the News-Gazette, Lexington, Virginia, and Bradley Hill, president of Interlink Inc., a postal software company.

###

The News Media Alliance is a nonprofit organization representing more than 2,000 news organizations and their multiplatform businesses in the United States and globally. Alliance members include print, digital and mobile publishers of original news content. Headquartered near Washington, D.C., the association focuses on ensuring the future of news media through communication, research, advocacy and innovation. Information about the News Media Alliance (formerly NAA) can be found at www.newsmediaalliance.org.

The post News Media Alliance, National Newspaper Association Agree to Combine Forces on Postal, Public Policy appeared first on News/Media Alliance.

Copyright Office should allow creators to register website content, provide protection against tech platforms exploiting news publisher content

Arlington, VA – The News Media Alliance submitted comments to the Register of Copyrights and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office, Shira Perlmutter, in response to the U.S. Copyright Office’s notice and request for public input to assist it in the preparation of the “Publishers’ Protection Study,” requested by Congress in order to provide a detailed examination of the online problems confronting press publishers, including the nature, scope and severity of the crisis facing the news publishing industry from the unlicensed uses of their online content, and its impact on the continued viability of news publishers to provide the public with important news and information in order to sustain a strong democracy.

In its comments, the Alliance highlights the need for key updates to the existing system to prevent further abuse of news publishers’ online content by the dominant tech platforms such as Google and Facebook.

Facebook and Google currently do not consistently or adequately compensate news publishers for use of their original content. They make millions of dollars off of that content, while also exerting anticompetitive dominance over the digital advertising ecosystem, which news publishers rely on to be able to continue investing in producing high-quality journalism.

According to Pew Research Center, news publisher advertising revenues fell from approximately $50 billion to an estimated $8.8 billion between 2005 and 2020, a reduction of over 80 percent.

The Alliance comments state that, “As the result of the unauthorized and uncompensated taking of headlines, reported and gathered factual data, and portions of news articles (including, for example, ledes) by these [dominant] platforms,” press publishers have lost advertising and subscription revenue which could be used to help fund news content. The platforms, meanwhile, argue that their use of news content is not copyright infringement under the Copyright Act.

Alliance Executive Vice President and General Counsel, Danielle Coffey, said, “Americans are consuming more news than ever, and yet we are facing a crisis in which news publishers across the country are being forced to close because they are not being compensated fairly for use of their original content. The Alliance thanks Senator Tillis for his leadership in requesting this study and commends the Copyright Office for this important undertaking that will highlight this crisis facing the news publishing industry, a critical copyright-based industry that has long benefited publishers, authors, and the news consuming public.”

In its comments, the Alliance recommends that in its study, the Copyright Office should offer “a menu of suggested viable solutions to allow Congress to make informed decisions about any necessary amendments to the Copyright Act, or other federal laws.”

In sum, the Alliance would respectfully ask the Copyright Office to: (1) conclude that the reproduction and public display of news content by aggregators is infringing; (2) implement changes to registration practices that would help protect press publishers; (3) look to Article 15 of the European Union (EU) Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (the “DSM Directive”) to help ensure that American publishers benefit from and receive compensation for the consumption of their content in the EU, by adopting strong national treatment provisions in any bilateral agreements with the EU; and (4) endorse the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act of 2021 (JCPA), intended to help address the market abuse of dominant online platforms.

The Alliance has been vocal in its support of an ancillary copyright and the ability for news publishers to register online content, such as through an ancillary copyright similar to that established in Europe in 2019. The adoption of an ancillary copyright in the United States would help balance the relationship between news publishers and the dominant online platforms and help news publishers get fair compensation for the use of their protected content online.

Earlier this year, Australia passed legislation to require the online platforms to compensate news publishers for the use of their content.

Coffey continued, “Americans cannot afford to lose more of the local news publishers they have come rely on and trust for critical information about news and events around the country and the world, as well as in their backyards, that impact their daily lives. The time to act is now. We must ensure the continued viability of high-quality journalism, which is the solution to combating harmful misinformation, fake news, and hate speech perpetuated via the social media platforms. We look forward to working with the Copyright Office to offer insight and data to assist them in suggesting solutions to Congress to address the current problems facing the industry.”

Read the Alliance’s full comments here.

###

Media Contact:
Lindsey Loving
Director, Communications
lindsey@newsmediaalliance.org

The News Media Alliance is a nonprofit organization representing more than 2,000 news organizations and their multiplatform businesses in the United States and globally. Alliance members include print, digital and mobile publishers of original news content. Headquartered near Washington, D.C., the association focuses on ensuring the future of news media through communication, research, advocacy and innovation. Information about the News Media Alliance (formerly NAA) can be found at www.newsmediaalliance.org.

The post News Media Alliance Calls for U.S. Copyright Office to Make Key Updates, Provide Additional Protections for Creators appeared first on News/Media Alliance.