HI,

On 18 May 2010 08:00, Francis Davey <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 17 May 2010 23:41, Matthew Somerville <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> The UK law bringing this EU directive in states (at
>> http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/73032--c.htm#13 ): "A property right
>> ("database right") subsists, in accordance with this Part, in a database if
>> there has been a substantial investment in obtaining, verifying or
>> presenting the contents of the database."
>>
>> Obtaining is not mentioned by that Wikipedia article, but is included in the
>> Directive. IANAL, so would not like to be drawn on what the PA have done in
>> this instance :)
>
> What's happening is you are talking about different things. The
> directive creates a spanking new intellectual property right which is
> what Matthew is talking about. At the same time the directive
> harmonised the copyright in databases which requires the "own
> intellectual creation" test.
>
> Example: football fixtures lists aren't subject to a database right
> (because the league doesn't have to expend much effort on verifying or
> obtaining them since they have them already as part of running the
> league, but they do get copyright because there's creative
> intellectual effort involved in putting them together (so the High
> Court was convinced).
>
> I'm quite ill at the moment so I have no idea whether what I am saying
> makes sense, but hopefully it does.

Yup, makes sense.

I was wondering about this football fixtures thing.  What if, once a
week, I asked 20 fans (one for each premiership team) when their next
team's fixture is, and put that into a database?

Presumably then I'm assembling a new database of facts myself?

Thanks,

Seb

_______________________________________________
Mailing list [email protected]
Archive, settings, or unsubscribe:
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public

Reply via email to