4 ms·

Raw data isn't copyrightable, at least here in the US. It is perfectly legal to go through a phone book and copy it.

by tjic 17y ago

ig1 17y ago
Database schemas however are. I believe Ireland also has the concept of database copyright (of course this would mean the act of scraping the timetables from the Dublin bus service website was also illegal)
- nroach 17y ago
  This isn't directly applicable to the OP, but since a lot of readers are in the US, I thought I'd go into a bit more detail. In the United States, compilations of data are protected by the Copyright statute. Specifically, any "collection and assembling of preexisting materials or of data that are selected in such a way that the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship". The underlying data is not protectable, but the structure and method of assembly, once the data are incorporated is. In Feist vs. Rural Telephone (499 U.S. 340 (1991)), the Supreme Court looked at what level of originality is required for a compilation to be protectable. The Court held that a white pages phone directory that is just a listing of numbers in a geographical area is not sufficiently original to be protected. Basically, that kind of listing is just a recitation of existing facts in a logical order. An important quote from that case sets out the factors for courts to consider in deciding what degree of originality is sufficient: "The compilation author typically chooses which facts to include, in what order to place them, and how to arrange the collected data so that they may be used effectively by readers. These choices as to selection and arrangement, so long as they are made independently by the compiler and entail a minimal degree of creativity, are sufficiently original that Congress may protect such compilations through the copyright laws. " As is often the case in the law, it doesn't give you a black and white answer, but instead gives a series of guidelines to follow.
swombat 17y ago
Actually, as far as I understand it, though a specific item of data is not copyrightable, the whole collection that you call a phone book is copyrightable. If I recall correctly, in fact, phone book producers usually include fake numbers in the phone book, so they can tell if you copied their version of the phone book, and sue you for it.
- mcherm 17y ago
  Your understanding is incorrect. In the US (which doesn't apply for this case!) the original case showing that the collection of data is NOT copyrightable was, in fact, a case about copying a phone book. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications_v._Rural_Telephone_Service http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications_v._Rural_Tel...

Raw data isn't copyrightable, at least here in the US. It is perfectly legal to go through a phone book and copy it.

by tjic 17y ago

Raw data isn't copyrightable, at least here in the US. It is perfectly legal to go through a phone book and copy it.

ig1 17y ago

Database schemas however are. I believe Ireland also has the concept of database copyright (of course this would mean the act of scraping the timetables from the Dublin bus service website was also illegal)

nroach 17y ago
This isn't directly applicable to the OP, but since a lot of readers are in the US, I thought I'd go into a bit more detail. In the United States, compilations of data are protected by the Copyright statute. Specifically, any "collection and assembling of preexisting materials or of data that are selected in such a way that the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship". The underlying data is not protectable, but the structure and method of assembly, once the data are incorporated is. In Feist vs. Rural Telephone (499 U.S. 340 (1991)), the Supreme Court looked at what level of originality is required for a compilation to be protectable. The Court held that a white pages phone directory that is just a listing of numbers in a geographical area is not sufficiently original to be protected. Basically, that kind of listing is just a recitation of existing facts in a logical order. An important quote from that case sets out the factors for courts to consider in deciding what degree of originality is sufficient: "The compilation author typically chooses which facts to include, in what order to place them, and how to arrange the collected data so that they may be used effectively by readers. These choices as to selection and arrangement, so long as they are made independently by the compiler and entail a minimal degree of creativity, are sufficiently original that Congress may protect such compilations through the copyright laws. " As is often the case in the law, it doesn't give you a black and white answer, but instead gives a series of guidelines to follow.

swombat 17y ago

Actually, as far as I understand it, though a specific item of data is not copyrightable, the whole collection that you call a phone book is copyrightable. If I recall correctly, in fact, phone book producers usually include fake numbers in the phone book, so they can tell if you copied their version of the phone book, and sue you for it.

mcherm 17y ago
Your understanding is incorrect. In the US (which doesn't apply for this case!) the original case showing that the collection of data is NOT copyrightable was, in fact, a case about copying a phone book. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications_v._Rural_Telephone_Service http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications_v._Rural_Tel...