Re: Ah, wonderful copyright

Has this been tested in court with regard to cataloging records
specifically? What about "notes" fields, are those data that can be
readily observed and recorded by anyone?  Are you a lawyer?   Do you
think a single case cited would be sufficient evidence in a legal
brief?  Is there other established (case)law that would be relevant
here, and perhaps suggest a different decision?

Sorry, don't mean to get testy, but I'm awfully sick of people assuming
they have the end word on copyright law. Copyright law is complex, and
certainly undergoing change right now do to changing environments.
Things are up in the air, and undecided. But I do agree that the
argument Terrence makes is the one someone defending themselves is
likely to make in court, and I think they'd have a fairly good chance of
succeeding, but I wouldn't want to bet my farm on it.

Jonathan

Terence Fitzgerald wrote:
> Catalog records are not protected by copyright.  They contain data that
> can be readily observed and recorded by anyone, and thus fail the minimal
> creativity standard set in 1998 in Matthew Bender v. West Publishing
> (http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/158_F3d_674.htm).  Of course,
> that doesn't mean you won't get sued . . .
>
> Terence Fitzgerald
> Humanities Index
> H. W. Wilson
>
>

--
Jonathan Rochkind
Sr. Programmer/Analyst
The Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
410.516.8886
rochkind (at) jhu.edu