[Wikipedia-l] derivative works (Galoob v. Nintendo)

[Anthony DiPierro]

There is a lot of misunderstanding here as to what constitutes a derivative
work.  But one need only look at Galoob v. Nintendo to dispel most of it:

"The examples of derivative works provided by the Act all physically
incorporate the underlying work or works. The Act's legislative history
similarly indicates that 'the infringing work must incorporate a portion of
the copyrighted work in some form.'"

The infringing work must incorporate a portion of the copyrighted work in
some form.  This might be the storyline, as in the case of fan fiction, but
if there is no incoporation of the copyrighted work in the alleged
infringing work, then there is no case, and a jury wouldn't even hear the
case because it would be dismissed by a judge before a jury was even
selected.

Oh yeah, and by the way,  the Database and Collections of Information
Misappropriation Act of 2003 never passed, and phone books are generally
*not* subject to copyright.

_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to 
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement