Re: Not copyrighting facts (RE: copyrighting FACTS???)

["Charles Oppenheim" <C.Oppenheim@lboro.ac.uk>]

I have not seen the Bill, but am making the assumption that it is closely
modelled on the EU Database Directive and on the attempt at the 1996 WIPO
Conference to pass an Agreement on database right.  The Directive does not
prevent anyone from copying individual facts, but prevents people from
copying without permission substantial portions of a database.  Although
controversial at the time (with both librarians/users, who suffered from
Mr Johnson's misapprehension/worries, and with the majority of publishers,
who felt that copyright law within the EU was adequate to deal with piracy
of databases), it has been in place throughout EU member states for nearly
a decade now without any major problems for librarians or end users.

However, what really intrigues me is Mr Johnson's claim that "information
is free".  A lot of information may be free at the point of use (e.g.,
material on the Web), but someone somewhere expended time and effort to
create it.  A lot of information is extremely expensive.  I cannot think
of any information that is both cost-free to create and to obtain.

Charles

Professor Charles Oppenheim
Department of Information Science
Loughborough University
Loughborough
Leics LE11 3TU
01509-223065
(fax) 01509-223053

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Seth Johnson" <seth.johnson@realmeasures.dyndns.org>
To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 8:31 PM
Subject: Re: Not copyrighting facts (RE: copyrighting FACTS???)

> David R. Cohen wrote:
>
>>If I, as a commercial publisher, collect data (public domain data) from
>>one or more sources, assemble it into a database -- perhaps with new
>>"value added" components or perhaps with sophisticated search and
>>retrieval software -- and offer for it for sale, my potential customers
>>will have to decide if I am providing them with a benefit that justifies
>>paying for "free" information.
>>
>>If they decide the answer is "No" and they want free access to the same
>>information for themselves, they should have every right to do so. They
>>can go the same source as I did, collect the same "facts" and even create
>>their own database. If they wish, they can also make that database freely
>>available as a public service -- and in competition to commercially
>>available products.
>>
>>It is my understanding that this was one of the first issues dealt with in
>>this legislation and the bill is not designed to affect that choice, or
>>process, in the slightest. The language in Section 4(a) of the bill
>>specifically and explicitly deals with this issue.
>>
>>http://www.arl.org/info/frn/copy/databasebill1003.pdf
>>
>>Why, however, should anyone be entitled to take MY work product (my "sweat
>>equity" if you will) for free? And potentially then offer my own product
>>"free" to anyone?
>
> Because information is free. [SNIP}
> Seth Johnson