Martin and all,
The Feist case is only really partially relevant to your query here. In
addition
I believe that your query has already been answered on more than one occasion.
The main equivocation is centered on the definition of what is "Raw Data"
as it relates the the Whois database itself.
Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
> Last week's Washington Post ran the following:
>
> "NSI argues that it has an exclusive right to the database because the
> >> company's original agreement with the National Science Foundation specified
> >> that it would own any "intellectual property" created by the
> >> address-registration business. "It's very clear that we have the rights to
> >> this data," said NSI spokesman Christopher Clough."
>
> While NSI may have a plausible argument, it is certainly not "very clear."
> In fact the statement seems wrong on its face, because while the structure,
> sequence and organization of database may be copyrightable, raw data, under
> most circumstances, is not protectable under copyright law, nor would raw
> whois data (the type a competitor might need) appear to be protected under
> trade secret law (as the whois data is not maintained as confidential
> information).
>
> I wrote to Don Telage and Chris Clough last week asking them to clarify the
> statement. I am not aware of a response to date. I respectfully request
> that NSI explain its statement regarding intellectual property claims in
> "this data" (which data precisely?), especially in view of the Feist case.
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
