This is an area where US law differs importantly from other countries. US
law protects compilations of facts only to the extent that the selection
of the facts is creative expression (and does not protect the facts
themselves). Many other jurisdictions (eg European Union) also offer
protectio
These links from the US copyright office seem relevant:
"Copyright Registration for Automated Databases"
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ65.html
and
"Furthermore, copyright protection does not extend to works consisting
entirely of information that is common property containing no original
au
Dear Brian, Peter, Spencer,
Thanks for your comments, which have cleared things up a little for
me. The thing I find most confusing about copyright is that it is
emergent, not atomic - ie. if you split a copyrighted work into small
enough pieces (eg. letters, pixels) those pieces are no longer
co
A relevant book on this important (and evolving) topic is
Math You Can't Use: Patents, Copyright, and Software
by Ben Klemens (2006)
__
R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide
Spencer Graves wrote:
> Dear Hadley:
> Brian's reply seems more consistent with what I've heard than
> Peter's.
That's a bit surprising, given that they are broadly in agreement, and
the actual legal source is Springer in both cases...
-pd
__
R
Dear Hadley:
P.s. Ben Klemens (2006) Math you can't use (Brookings) cites cases
where people have been successfully sued for copyright infringement for
using a theorem they independently discovered. That's pretty scary to
me and seems totally unreasonable, but apparently the law at
Dear Hadley:
Brian's reply seems more consistent with what I've heard than
Peter's.
The briefest summary I know of copyright law is that expression
but not ideas can be copyrighted. Copyright law exists to promote
useful arts, and a compilation of data is intended to be useful.
hadley wickham wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> This is a little bit off-topic, but I was wondering if anyone has any
> informed opinion on whether data (ie. a dataset) is copyrightable?
>
> Hadley
>
In general not, I believe. E.g., I didn't have to ask formal permission
to use data from Altman's book in
On Sat, 12 May 2007, hadley wickham wrote:
> This is a little bit off-topic, but I was wondering if anyone has any
> informed opinion on whether data (ie. a dataset) is copyrightable?
Yes, informed (we discussed this with legally qualified authorities when
MASS was first published with software/
Dear all,
This is a little bit off-topic, but I was wondering if anyone has any
informed opinion on whether data (ie. a dataset) is copyrightable?
Hadley
__
R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do re
10 matches
Mail list logo
