3 ms·
That's not how the courts view these issues. Fake facts hidden within real facts have been litigated many times and has always been shown to be uncopyrightable.
by lalaland1125 6y ago
That's not how the courts view these issues. Fake facts hidden within real facts have been litigated many times and has always been shown to be uncopyrightable. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street#Legal_issues https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street#Legal_issues.
- bryanrasmussen 6y agoYou are correct, about Trap Streets. I'm not sure if the language is fake facts hidden in real facts, or fake streets in maps. Because it seems pretty specific to trap steets. If the language is indeed not general beyond trap streets - if I create a fake celebrity and data regarding them, I would argue that is more like making a story. A trap street is a small line on the map (generally hidden somewhere unimportant) and a couple words. A fake celebrity requires much more content. From the PDF "I added fivecompletely conjured celebrities to the site. I used stock photos with entirely made up names, biographies and net worth numbers. I published the pages backdated several yearsso they were nearly invisible to the world." Now, let's look at a real celebrity on their site https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/actors/simon-cowell-net-worth/ https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/actors... It seems reasonable to assume from the pdf that they put the kind of effort into an article on the fake celebrities to make them indistinguishable from real celebrities, it may be decided that this is the same as a trap street. But I don't think it is just a foregone conclusion. Aside from all that - https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/mar/06/andrewclark https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/mar/06/andrewclark they might be able to sue in some other place than the U.S and find a more sympathetic court.