3 ms·

> Copyrights don't protect novelty. Yes, and no. I can't speak for laws in the USA, as I'm from Europe. But Copyright-laws in the EU do have parts which specif

> Copyrights don't protect novelty. Yes, and no. I can't speak for laws in the USA, as I'm from Europe. But Copyright-laws in the EU do have parts which specifically target mixing and mashups of content, and how much new content of your you need to add to make it count as a separate work. These parts were recently updated, because of YouTube, the meme-culture and so on. But it's my understanding that for music and text-quotes, the whole concept is already longer around. So I guess US-Laws do have something like this too? So of course, this does not handle novelty on a global scale for all of mankind's knowledge and content, but the general Idea and how to handle it is there. > Two people can independently create the same thing and both be entitled to copyright. Similar maybe. But for literally the same, I doubt it. People are getting already sued for having too much similarity.

freejazz 4y ago
My point is more that, in the way the law works out, what you get to protect is the part of an expression that is unique to you, which can include mashups, etc. My point being that this is perhaps distinct from novelty, as novelty isn't a requirement of copyright, just independent creation. >Similar maybe. But for literally the same, I doubt it. People are getting already sued for having too much similarity. Full stop yes. Independent creation of the same thing is not an issue in copyright law in the US. I do not speak about Euro copyright, as I'm merely a US atty. In US copyright law, a necessary element of infringement is access to the allegedly copied work - if access to the work is rebutted, then there is no copying and no infringement. The copyright stands.