RE: [dvd-discuss] Copyright ranges

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

On 6 Aug 2002 at 9:18, Richard Hartman wrote:

From:           	Richard Hartman <hartman@onetouch.com>
To:             	"'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-
discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
Subject:        	RE: [dvd-discuss] Copyright ranges
Date sent:      	Tue, 6 Aug 2002 09:18:03 -0700 
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> Interesting question.  I think there is a functional/expressive difference
> here.  The output of the compilers is generated from input created by a
> person especially  to be converted by the compiler.  The output of a search
> engine is the result of a mechanistic process -- nothing is really _generated_
> by this, it is _collected_ and presented.  I would say that the results of
> Google searches would not be copyrightable.
> 
> Otoh, if the courts had been led down this line of reasoning it should also
> follow that Google searches could not be held as _violating_ copyright, and yet
> it has (requiring Google to remove certain URLs from the results of certain
> searches).  

ESTOPPEL! That's the way the internet works. If you don't like it don't get on 
it. It's like trying to pass a law that people should look at someone naked in 
public.

> 
> I would hope that this ruling was merely a result of a poor understanding of the
> process and not how copyright law would function if properly informed.
> 
> -- 
> -Richard M. Hartman
> hartman@onetouch.com
> 
> 186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas Olsson [mailto:dvd-discuss@armware.dk]
> > Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 2:05 PM
> > To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> > Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Copyright ranges
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks to all for the explanations.
> > 
> > In <news:local.ml.dvd-discuss> on Mon 05 Aug, Wendy Seltzer wrote:
> > > [...] If a second edition includes new material, the later 
> > > publication date applies only to the new material, so a 
> > notice might 
> > > include both dates.
> > 
> > I guess a range is suitable for web pages and programs, that 
> > get updated
> > more often than other things.
> > 
> > Is it possible to claim copyright forever on server-generated pages?
> > If it keeps changing every time you fetch it (even if it eventually
> > happens to change to something it has served before), could you claim
> > that every page is a new derived work that is protected?
> > 
> > The fact that an automated script is the "author" should not matter,
> > since there seems to be copyright on the output from compilers.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Thomas
> > 
> > -- 
> > 	9876543210  Magic tab-o-meter.		http://www.armware.dk/
> >          ^
> >      The opinions expressed herein may not reflect official 
> > RIAA policy.
> >