Re: [dvd-discuss] HTML-enhanced censorware DMCA Exemptions hearings

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

INteresting point on page 26

MR. BURT: Well, our work has copyright protection to it. Databases do have 
copyright protection, and they can be 
copyrighted. We want to protect that investment that we have of our database. 
We want to protect that intellectual property, that editorial
judgments that we make in this database that we have created. 

What a crock of crap!

Database contain DATA. Data is facts. Facts are not copyrighted. Now Burt want 
to create editorical judgment as the reason for a FACT being copyrighted. It's 
idiocy to even think that that constitutes intellectual property. If somebody 
wants to create "Joe Scholars Pick of Poe" then "Joe Blow's Pick of Poe" with 
the same selection get's copyright protection? What stupidity! 

The whole notion of compilation copyrights is nonsensical. The whole notion of 
database copyrights is equally so.

On 27 May 2003 at 22:56, Seth Finkelstein wrote:

Date sent:      	Tue, 27 May 2003 22:56:31 -0400
From:           	Seth Finkelstein <sethf@sethf.com>
To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject:        	[dvd-discuss] HTML-enhanced censorware DMCA Exemptions 
hearings
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

>  I've just put up HTML-enhanced versions of the censorware
> hearings, on my own website at:
> 
>  Apr 11, DC - Seth Finkelstein, Jonathan Band, David Burt:
> 
> http://sethf.com/anticensorware/hearing_dc.php 
> 
>  May 14, CA - James Tyre, Steve Metalitz:
> 
> http://sethf.com/anticensorware/hearing_ca.php 
> 
>  These are my *unofficial* HTML versions of the PDF versions. 
> They have readability-enhancements, with my corrections and relevant links.
> 
> -- 
> Seth Finkelstein  Consulting Programmer  sethf@sethf.com  http://sethf.com
> Anticensorware Investigations - http://sethf.com/anticensorware/
> Seth Finkelstein's Infothought blog - http://sethf.com/infothought/blog/