3 ms·

There was no guidance whatsoever on the website I bought it from as to whether or not I could or couldn't redistribute. I agreed to nothing, I didn't click "ne

There was no guidance whatsoever on the website I bought it from as to whether or not I could or couldn't redistribute. I agreed to nothing, I didn't click "next" on any licensing terms. The site I got if from was really pretty sketchy. The site was only 3 or 4 pages. A description of the product, a price list, a "buy now" page and a download page. I clicked the buy now button, paid $50 and downloaded a CSV. No license, no agreements. Nothing. Also, it was a March '09 that I did this, not March '10. Sorry about that. I'm really not trying to be shady at all with this, and I really had no idea that people would be uncomfortable with something like this or think it's wrong. If people have serious moral qualms about this being here, I'm happy to take it down. I just thought it was an interesting hack so I thought I'd share it.

smanek 17y ago
By the Berne convention, everything is copywritten on creation. And, to the best of my knowledge, the default is that you can't distribute a copywritten work unless you have an explicit license to do so. For example, I can walk into a book store and buy Harry Potter for cash, without signing a license agreement. But, that doesn't mean I can redistribute its contents. You are usually allowed to resell what you bought under the first sale doctrine (but not to sell copies of it). IANAL, etc etc
- secret 17y ago
  I think there is an exception for "facts," although it may only apply to individual facts, not a collectioon of them. Any one here know more about this?
  - 0x44 17y ago
    I'm not a lawyer, but per Feist v. Rural, facts cannot be copyrighted in the United States. Collections of facts may be eligible for copyright, but it requires authorship, and hinges on the creativity of presentation (the author must select which facts to include, how to present them, etc.) but the facts within the collection are not entitled to copyright protection. If this collection was generated automatically by accessing the Google API, it would probably not qualify for copyright protection based on a lack of creativity in its creation. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=499&invol=340 http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&#3...

smanek 17y ago

By the Berne convention, everything is copywritten on creation. And, to the best of my knowledge, the default is that you can't distribute a copywritten work unless you have an explicit license to do so. For example, I can walk into a book store and buy Harry Potter for cash, without signing a license agreement. But, that doesn't mean I can redistribute its contents. You are usually allowed to resell what you bought under the first sale doctrine (but not to sell copies of it). IANAL, etc etc

secret 17y ago
I think there is an exception for "facts," although it may only apply to individual facts, not a collectioon of them. Any one here know more about this?
- 0x44 17y ago
  I'm not a lawyer, but per Feist v. Rural, facts cannot be copyrighted in the United States. Collections of facts may be eligible for copyright, but it requires authorship, and hinges on the creativity of presentation (the author must select which facts to include, how to present them, etc.) but the facts within the collection are not entitled to copyright protection. If this collection was generated automatically by accessing the Google API, it would probably not qualify for copyright protection based on a lack of creativity in its creation. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=499&invol=340 http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&#3...