On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 11:12 PM, Francis Davey <fjm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5 August 2010 22:26, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Francis > > Indeed. Let's start getting specific. The threshold in the US is very > low > > - which incidentally is where this "you can't copyright facts" stuff > > originated. > > I may have missed that part of the discussion. Francis, sorry I was referring to the whole OSM license change debate. I seem to recall that it orginated some years ago when someone exclaimed "we'd better change the license because you can't copyright facts in the US". > If you mean that the US > is where the question first arose, then the US is certainly not the > only place where this argument has arisen - it was a hot topic in > English copyright law in the 19th (and to some extent in the 18th) > century. But if you mean that it was the jurisdiction people had in > mind when drafting the OdbL then that may well be right (I have no > idea bout the history). > I believe it was one of the jurisdictions that was considered, and because there is no database right in the US the additional contract provisions of ODbL were added. But I guess that only Jordan would have the definitive answer to that question. > > > > > What's the criteria in the EU? Do you know? > > > > "own intellectual creation" > > Article 3(1) of 96/9/EC: > > "1. In accordance with this Directive, databases which, by reason of > the selection or arrangement of their contents, constitute the > author's own intellectual creation shall be protected as such by > copyright. No other criteria shall be applied to determine their > eligibility for that protection." > > I was actually asking about the criteria for traditional copyright not database rights. However the reference above is interesting in that it asserts that selection and arrangement is required to earn a database right. Is that a correct interpretation of what that says? Would a dump of a list of facts with no selection or arrangement (for example a list of names of all elected Members of Parliament) be protected by database rights? > Exactly what this means in practice is certainly a present hot topic. > > -- > Francis Davey > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk