New York Times Company v. Tasini 533 U.S. 483 (2001) A number of freelance journalists (including Tasini) wrote articles that were published in various publications (including the NY Times). Contracts were written and the journalists were paid for their work. Later, the publishers contracted with database services (like LEXIS/NEXIS) to put all the articles in searchable, online databases. The journalists sued for copyright infringement. The journalists argued that they had never contracted for their work to be put into a database, especially since they weren't going to get paid anything extra. The publishers argued that 17 U.S.C. §201(c) said that, "copyright in each separate contribution to a collective work is distinct from copyright in the collective work as a whole." The Trial Court found for the publishers. The journalists appealed. The Appellate Court reversed. The publishers appealed. The US Supreme Court reversed and found that the publisher did not have the right to put the article in a database. The US Supreme Court found that §201(c) allowed a publisher to republish a contributor's work in three special circumstances: In the collective work itself, In a revision of that collective work, In a later collective work in the same series. The Court found that the database was not the same as the original publication format, therefore it did not count as part of the original collective work, or a revision. In a dissent it was argued that reprinting the periodical in Braille or on microfilm would have a different form than the original, but those would be ok under §201(c), so why not a searchable database?