Michael Snow wrote:
The phone directories case (Feist v. Rural) is not
relevant or helpful
to us here. The point there was that telephone listings involve purely
a compilation of factual information. The selection of encyclopedia
subjects does not--as we should know, it involves considerable
editorial judgment.
They copied more than we would. They had names AND phone numbers; we're
satisfied with names only.
If we copy titles from Columbia or anywhere else, it's a bad idea.
Comparative advertising is a dubious defense, especially since right
now it sounds like we're using this much more for internal reference
than for outside advertising.
Internal reference involves less than comparative advertising
Besides, like all fair use, it depends on the factual
situation, and
part of the equation is the scope of copying going on. Wholesale
copying of article titles is not likely to be fair use under any
analysis.
If it turns out that the list is not copyrightable fair use is moot.
Ec