From: nagasiva (nagasiva@luckymojo.com)
Date: Sun Jun 23 2002 - 20:25:38 CDT
> From: "David A. Roth" < >
> Subject: [faq-maintainers]
> "E-Legal: Court Holds Internet FAQ Pages Not Subject to
> Copyright Protection" article
> "E-Legal: Court Holds Internet FAQ Pages Not Subject to
> Copyright Protection"
>
> The article can be found on the web site below:
>
> http://www.law.com/cgi-bin/gx.cgi/AppLogic+FTContentServer?pagename=law/View&c=Article&cid=ZZZY33EQG1D&live=true&cst=1&pc=0&pa=0&s=News&ExpIgnore=true&showsummary=0he following summary judgement:
article contents include the following summary judgement:
"there is no truth to plaintiff's assertion that
many of defendants' questions and answers are 'nearly
identical' to plaintiff's."
that is, it wasn't really copyright infringement at all, just
a snarlfest between two competing manufacturers who were
duking it out over who can and who can't have *a FAQ*. they
were trying to claim copyright for *the formatting and
structure of FAQ*s! it is no wonder that there was no trial.
FAQs can be copyrighted, but their specific language and
content must be unique (i.e. authored by someone) before
this is truly possible. in the case described, the similarity
between the two FAQs in question was merely due to the fact
that they were both about the same product, not because of
plagiarism.
nagasiva
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe send a message to as
unsubscribe faq-maintainers fill-in-your-email-address-here
*************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Aug 12 2002 - 14:56:24 CDT