In case your wife wants a story line to take to a lawyer should she ever
have the misfortune of having to test the matter in court, consider the
following:
The legal precedents are the following:
- a compilation is copyrightable (value added by creation of composite)
- a catalog is not (strictly derivative)
Note: a page of links would superficially appear to have some of the
characteristics of either a compilation or of a catalog.
My professional analysis of this would be that what she has done is the
intellectual-content-equivalent of a compilation; She has posited some
notion of relevance and created something by determinations of relevance
which gives you a virtual composite work. Had she simply linked to
the parts of what was already identified as a whole elsewhere, it
would have been comparable to a catalog. However, the judgement of
relevance to the theme here is original effort, and the result should
be viewed as copyrightable.
File that in your pearl harbor file shold anybody attempt to reverse
the administrators' action in court.
-- Al Gilman I am not a lawyer. Law is too important to be left to the lawyers. There is a plausible basis to suppose that I might be recognized as an expert witness if this matter came to court.
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved