4 ms·

Yes, at some point someone has probably written a copy.

by pwdisswordfishc 3y ago

withinboredom 3y ago
I thought contracts can’t be copyrighted? There is too much similarity between them for it to make any sense.
- hnbad 3y ago
  No, that's nonsense. I don't know if there's a special exemption in the US but contracts and policies can be and absolutely are under copyright. Individual clauses might not be but the contract in its entirety likely meets the threshold of originality required for it to not simply be considered a plain collection of facts. The similarity between standard contracts does make it harder to demonstrate a copyright violation based on the text alone though.
  - withinboredom 3y ago
    So, you’re saying only one company in the history of the world can install garages, or every company that wants to install garages must pay that company or ensure that it’s contracts are distinctly different so they don’t get sued? That sounds absurd. What country is this?
    - thephyber 3y ago
      That’s not what your parent said and you jumped a lot of logical steps to get where you did. No form of intellectual property applies to “in the history of the world” — all IPs expire their monopoly protections after a period of time. And yes, contracts must be distinctly different from copyrighted contracts. [1] Just because computers and the internet allow copy-paste of content with no effort does not mean it is necessarily legal. [1] https://www.upcounsel.com/are-contracts-copyrighted#using-someone-else-s-contract-is-it-legal https://www.upcounsel.com/are-contracts-copyrighted#using-so...
      - withinboredom 3y ago
        I’m not sure what “logical steps” I jumped. All you have to do is prove someone else is selling garages and they stole your copyright in a violation of derivative work. It’s absurd to think copyrights can be be applied to contracts. It’s a hill I’d be willing to die on if someone sued me for it.
        hnbad 3y ago
        I don't understand how you make the leap from "if copyright can apply to legal documents it can also apply to arbitrary physical objects". Doubling down on ignorance seems like a bad way to learn new things but you do you. Heck, this is very easy to google: https://www.quora.com/If-you-ask-a-lawyer-to-draft-a-contract-can-the-lawyer-really-own-the-copyright?share=1 https://www.quora.com/If-you-ask-a-lawyer-to-draft-a-contrac... https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/24521/are-the-individual-terms-of-a-contract-copyrighted https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/24521/are-the-indivi... https://www.upcounsel.com/are-contracts-copyrighted https://www.upcounsel.com/are-contracts-copyrighted Contracts are text and text is subject to copyright. You seem to be confused about the difference between copyright, patents and trademarks though. That copyright applies to contracts does not mean it's possible for two different lawyers to end up writing almost identical contracts. It instead means it's very difficult to demonstrate copyright infringement based on the text alone. But if you simply copy a contract verbatim that you demonstrably had access to and can't demonstrate how you arrived at the exact same wording (e.g. if you're a layperson and have never written a contract before), it's probably an easy case for the copyright holder to win. This will apparently blow your mind but in some jurisdictions outside the US such as the EU, mere collections of facts ("databases") are also protected by copyright: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right Note that this does not mean you can't collect the same facts, it just means you can't harvest them from an existing collection and reproduce them the same way. So you couldn't just publish your own knock-off white pages phone book but you could publish a phone book as long as it is not sourced from an existing one. Please remember: this does not apply in US copyright law.
        withinboredom 3y ago

Yes, at some point someone has probably written a copy.

withinboredom 3y ago

I thought contracts can’t be copyrighted? There is too much similarity between them for it to make any sense.

hnbad 3y ago
No, that's nonsense. I don't know if there's a special exemption in the US but contracts and policies can be and absolutely are under copyright. Individual clauses might not be but the contract in its entirety likely meets the threshold of originality required for it to not simply be considered a plain collection of facts. The similarity between standard contracts does make it harder to demonstrate a copyright violation based on the text alone though.
- withinboredom 3y ago
  So, you’re saying only one company in the history of the world can install garages, or every company that wants to install garages must pay that company or ensure that it’s contracts are distinctly different so they don’t get sued? That sounds absurd. What country is this?
  - thephyber 3y ago
    That’s not what your parent said and you jumped a lot of logical steps to get where you did. No form of intellectual property applies to “in the history of the world” — all IPs expire their monopoly protections after a period of time. And yes, contracts must be distinctly different from copyrighted contracts. [1] Just because computers and the internet allow copy-paste of content with no effort does not mean it is necessarily legal. [1] https://www.upcounsel.com/are-contracts-copyrighted#using-someone-else-s-contract-is-it-legal https://www.upcounsel.com/are-contracts-copyrighted#using-so...
    - withinboredom 3y ago
      I’m not sure what “logical steps” I jumped. All you have to do is prove someone else is selling garages and they stole your copyright in a violation of derivative work. It’s absurd to think copyrights can be be applied to contracts. It’s a hill I’d be willing to die on if someone sued me for it.
      - hnbad 3y ago
        I don't understand how you make the leap from "if copyright can apply to legal documents it can also apply to arbitrary physical objects". Doubling down on ignorance seems like a bad way to learn new things but you do you. Heck, this is very easy to google: https://www.quora.com/If-you-ask-a-lawyer-to-draft-a-contract-can-the-lawyer-really-own-the-copyright?share=1 https://www.quora.com/If-you-ask-a-lawyer-to-draft-a-contrac... https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/24521/are-the-individual-terms-of-a-contract-copyrighted https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/24521/are-the-indivi... https://www.upcounsel.com/are-contracts-copyrighted https://www.upcounsel.com/are-contracts-copyrighted Contracts are text and text is subject to copyright. You seem to be confused about the difference between copyright, patents and trademarks though. That copyright applies to contracts does not mean it's possible for two different lawyers to end up writing almost identical contracts. It instead means it's very difficult to demonstrate copyright infringement based on the text alone. But if you simply copy a contract verbatim that you demonstrably had access to and can't demonstrate how you arrived at the exact same wording (e.g. if you're a layperson and have never written a contract before), it's probably an easy case for the copyright holder to win. This will apparently blow your mind but in some jurisdictions outside the US such as the EU, mere collections of facts ("databases") are also protected by copyright: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right Note that this does not mean you can't collect the same facts, it just means you can't harvest them from an existing collection and reproduce them the same way. So you couldn't just publish your own knock-off white pages phone book but you could publish a phone book as long as it is not sourced from an existing one. Please remember: this does not apply in US copyright law.
        withinboredom 3y ago