3 ms·
I understand that bare facts cannot be copyrighted but IMO, a better test in this case is to ask whether the information has any monetary value? Because once it
by woadwarrior01 6y ago
I understand that bare facts cannot be copyrighted but IMO, a better test in this case is to ask whether the information has any monetary value? Because once it is under the posession of the data brokers, it's aggregated and traded like chattel.
- kube-system 6y agoIf you were to add to title 17: "facts are subject to copyright protection if they have monetary value" -- you still have not solved the problem. Again, copyright doesn't apply to the subject of a work, it applies to the one who created it. Also, your proposed change has made most of Wikipedia illegal.