[WikiEN-l] Copyright question ("compilation copyright")

[George Herbert]

On 4/5/07, Anthony <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> On 4/4/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 16:48:48 -0400, "The Cunctator"
> > <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >I thought you said the Cool Wall  list doesn't ever appear in its entirety
> > >on the show.
> >
> > Not as text, it appears as a pictorial representation.
> >
> So the use in question is highly transformative.  That's one factor in favor.
>
> And the Cool Wall *doesn't* appear in its entirety, if you're claiming
> that is the work in question.  Only the text of the wall appears,
> rearranged in a non-creative order.  That's another factor which is
> neutral at worst.
>
> I'd say there's no way this is copyright infringement.  On the other
> hand, it's not free content either.  So the question shouldn't be
> whether or not this falls under fair use, but whether or not it's the
> type of fair use which belongs in a free encyclopedia.

I actually think that merely describing lists of photos, or
transcribing what is in them, doesn't infringe their copyright at all.
 We're not transforming artwork (Rogers case), we're transforming a
list of facts from one format (images of cars) into another (text); in
the US, mere lists of facts aren't copyrightable (cf all the phone
book copyright-doesn't-apply rulings).


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com