Since it appears that GateHouse Media and the New York Times Co. are still working out the details of their proposed settlement, I’m thinking we’re not going to hear anything for a bit. Perhaps the two sides will put out a joint statement, but I’ve seen nothing yet.
The Boston Globe has a brief story here, and GateHouse, with an assist from the Associated Press, runs an account here.
Discover more from Media Nation
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Bob Sprague
What — no story from Wicked Local? Isn’t this story, well, “wicked local”?Bob Sprague
ben
Most of the time any settlement will be confidential. I wouldn’t expect to hear much. I doubt there was much money exchanged. Perhaps Boston.com will stop linking?
Jerry
The Globe’s version seems to have gone AWOL at this hour.
ron-newman
Globe article has moved. And now with Settlement Details!http://www.boston.com/business/ticker/2009/01/nyt_gatehouse_r.html“GateHouse Media Inc. will set up technical barriers preventing Boston.com, the Boston Globe’s website, from automated “scraping” of GateHouse content, and Boston.com has agreed to honor those barriers under a settlement disclosed this morning in a widely watched lawsuit filed by GateHouse against The New York Times Co., owner of the Globe and Boston.com.”
ron-newman
And now the full text of the agreement is available here: http://nytco.com/pdf/Agreement.pdf
Ted M
So what do we all think??? Looks like automated feed pulling is verboten on both sides. No legal precedent because it’s a settlement, but it would be interesting to be inside the lawyers’ heads here.
DavidMastio
Having read the agreement, the NYT’s clearly caved? Why is the big question.My bet — Boston.com’s local sites appeared, at least in some cases, to be pulling the majority of their links from one site.That made the Boston.com sites a direct replacement for the wicked local site and risked tipping the fair use test to GateHouse.