4 ms·

Does this apply even when the "copyright holder" has meaningfully manipulated the information in order for it to be in a useful form? Have they imparted some I

by pkfrank 13y ago

Does this apply even when the "copyright holder" has meaningfully manipulated the information in order for it to be in a useful form? Have they imparted some IP that is now protected in some way? IE, could I mirror deep-level sports statistics without attribution? One would think the agency I "took" it from had applied meaningful resources to extrapolating this data, which may be in fact be statement of fact. I'm purely playing devil's advocate.

teraflop 13y ago
My understanding (as a non-lawyer) is that it depends on your jurisdiction. In the US, copyright normally only applies to works of creative expression, and not to facts or ideas. However, you can argue that the selection of facts that are compiled into a database involves creativity; in that case, the database as a whole may be protected, even though the individual facts aren't. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_States#Compilations_of_facts_and_the_sweat_of_the_brow_doctrine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_Sta...
- icambron 13y ago
  IANAL, but since the database is just (presumably) all of the classes at Yale, it's hard to see how their selection could be copyrightable. I haven't used the app, but it's quite possible they have course descriptions in there too, though, which are copyrightable. But then there's the separate question of why Yale wants to do any of this.
  - Crito 13y ago
    > But then there's the separate question of why Yale wants to do any of this. I suspect that providing easy/effective access to course and professor ratings trampled on some feet. Somebody's course enrollment is hurting and making somebody look bad.
    - curiouscats 13y ago
      But what are these people thinking? Do they really think Yale students are so lame they can't get around censorship easily to get the data they want? If the students are that lame they need to select better students, it seems to me.
bhickey 13y ago
Sweat of the brow and database rights aren't recognized in the United States.
jrochkind1 13y ago
In the US, yes, the selection and arrangement of facts _can_ be protected by copyright. It needs to be an arrangement or presentation that involves a significant degree of creative choice, not an arrangement that is obviously inherent in or determined by the facts themselves. (For instance, an alphabetic arrangement of terms would obviously not be copyrightable either, but the order of a list of buildings ranked by prettiest might be). The individual sports statistics are definitey not protected by copyright -- nobody can require me to get permission to tell you that Joe Blow has an RBI of X. But if you copy the entire database of sports statistics from someone, and present them in the same order/categories, those elements (selection and arrangement) _might_ be copyrightable -- it depends on the specifics and how well the lawyers make their case that the particular selection and arrangement involved were creative choices, not just obvious in the data itself. In the U.S. , that you "applied meaningful resources to extrapolating" is completely irrelevant to copyright -- that it took lots of resources to assemble purely factual information still does not make them copyrightable. This is known as the 'sweat of the brow doctrine', and the courts in the U.S. decided that it did _not_ apply to copyright here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow#US_copyright_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow#US_copyright_...

by pkfrank 13y ago

teraflop 13y ago

My understanding (as a non-lawyer) is that it depends on your jurisdiction. In the US, copyright normally only applies to works of creative expression, and not to facts or ideas. However, you can argue that the selection of facts that are compiled into a database involves creativity; in that case, the database as a whole may be protected, even though the individual facts aren't. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_States#Compilations_of_facts_and_the_sweat_of_the_brow_doctrine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_Sta...

icambron 13y ago
IANAL, but since the database is just (presumably) all of the classes at Yale, it's hard to see how their selection could be copyrightable. I haven't used the app, but it's quite possible they have course descriptions in there too, though, which are copyrightable. But then there's the separate question of why Yale wants to do any of this.
- Crito 13y ago
  > But then there's the separate question of why Yale wants to do any of this. I suspect that providing easy/effective access to course and professor ratings trampled on some feet. Somebody's course enrollment is hurting and making somebody look bad.
  - curiouscats 13y ago
    But what are these people thinking? Do they really think Yale students are so lame they can't get around censorship easily to get the data they want? If the students are that lame they need to select better students, it seems to me.

bhickey 13y ago

Sweat of the brow and database rights aren't recognized in the United States.

jrochkind1 13y ago

In the US, yes, the selection and arrangement of facts _can_ be protected by copyright. It needs to be an arrangement or presentation that involves a significant degree of creative choice, not an arrangement that is obviously inherent in or determined by the facts themselves. (For instance, an alphabetic arrangement of terms would obviously not be copyrightable either, but the order of a list of buildings ranked by prettiest might be). The individual sports statistics are definitey not protected by copyright -- nobody can require me to get permission to tell you that Joe Blow has an RBI of X. But if you copy the entire database of sports statistics from someone, and present them in the same order/categories, those elements (selection and arrangement) _might_ be copyrightable -- it depends on the specifics and how well the lawyers make their case that the particular selection and arrangement involved were creative choices, not just obvious in the data itself. In the U.S. , that you "applied meaningful resources to extrapolating" is completely irrelevant to copyright -- that it took lots of resources to assemble purely factual information still does not make them copyrightable. This is known as the 'sweat of the brow doctrine', and the courts in the U.S. decided that it did _not_ apply to copyright here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow#US_copyright_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow#US_copyright_...