[Foundation-l] copyright question about data

[Ray Saintonge]

Neil Harris wrote:

> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>> Edward Peschko wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 05:38:42PM -0700, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>>
>>>> Andre Engels wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 11, 2005 11:42 PM, Edward Peschko <esp5 at pge.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What's the legal status of data retrieved from non-public domain 
>>>>>> sources?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I understand that text that is retrieved from copyrighted 
>>>>>> materials is
>>>>>> copyrighted, but how about data and figures that deal with common 
>>>>>> interest
>>>>>> topics? Can you really copyright the amount of wheat grown in a 
>>>>>> year in
>>>>>> bangladesh, or the number of accidents in a year on california 
>>>>>> roads?  
>>>>>
>>>>> No, you cannot copyright the data itself. What is copyrighted is the
>>>>> *representation* of the data, while the *selection* of the data MIGHT
>>>>> be copyrighted.  
>>>>
>>>> This is a very important distinction.  The selection issue can be 
>>>> difficult, and is most applicable when you are using the same 
>>>> subset of data as someone else.  If you and the other person are 
>>>> providing complete data that is not a breech since there is only 
>>>> one way to have everything. :-)  Also an obvious form of 
>>>> representation of the material (such as alphabetical order) is not 
>>>> copyrightable.  
>>>
>>> How about augmented data? Ie: say someone has a set of data that 
>>> you'd like
>>> to keep in its entirety, but you add some features that text cannot 
>>> possibly
>>> have (like, say links to supporting papers for important datapoints, 
>>> or zoom-in on graphs). Is that considered copyright infringement?
>>
>> Augmenting data helps to establish the fact that you are not limiting 
>> yourself to the original author's selection process..  In many of 
>> these cases determining whether there has been a breech of copyright 
>> will never be a black and white situation.  We really are looking at 
>> a balance of probabilities.
>
> I am not a lawyer, but, in the United States at least, isn't Feist v. 
> Rural relevant?

Definitely.  For those interested see 
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=499&invol=340

Ec