I worked for a web firm that was hit with a threatened lawsuit for "copyright infringement", and did the legal research for my boss that included a guerilla study of the FEIST v RURAL decision about eight years ago...
I don't think many of the comments truly understand just how much information is on a typical web site, both on the page and in the server, that would be subject to a reversal of FEIST.
In our case, to give an idea, we presented a "how to" for homeowners on repairing common appliances and when to call the professionals.
Consider this...there are only so many ways that you can say: "Replace the worn part."
That's what we were threatened over; C&D letters and responses flying around, and out of the midst of this, researching for an attorney on our side, I ran across FEIST and Shepardized it out.
We ran with it, pointing out the case, reinforcing the decision, and having the weight of a unanimous Supreme Court decision behind it.
We won. The other guys backed down. We passed the word to a few other web sites being similarly threatened, and the attornies ran like vampires in sunlight.
But this _simple_ of an example, where a common and expected phrase becomes part of a "database", shows how HR 3261 can be applied to us all if it should pass.
This bill needs to be stopped...not just for the threat to the internet, but to basic research, to common students trying to do term papers, to authors trying to write, to even repeating breaking news from a web site or the TV.
Yeah, the real threat here has nothing to do with linux (i know many/. readers relate EVERYTHING to linux, but there are, infact, more important issues...)
With such a bill in place, companies could stop organizations and individuals from releasing damaging reports--whoever collects the data can simply copyright it, and then the data is locked away. I'm all for capitalism--but for it to work, both sides of any transaction must know all the data about the transaction. Therefore, if a given product is defec
This bill needs to be stopped...not just for the threat to the internet, but to basic research...
Not to mention that it is most likely unconstitutional, given that Feist was heavily influenced by the copyright & patent clause of the US Constitution. The Bill also lacks the fair use clause present in the Copyright provisions in the US Code.
"Be there. Aloha."
-- Steve McGarret, _Hawaii Five-Oh_
Been There, Done That, Must Fight (Score:5, Informative)
I don't think many of the comments truly understand just how much information is on a typical web site, both on the page and in the server, that would be subject to a reversal of FEIST.
In our case, to give an idea, we presented a "how to" for homeowners on repairing common appliances and when to call the professionals.
Consider this...there are only so many ways that you can say: "Replace the worn part."
That's what we were threatened over; C&D letters and responses flying around, and out of the midst of this, researching for an attorney on our side, I ran across FEIST and Shepardized it out.
We ran with it, pointing out the case, reinforcing the decision, and having the weight of a unanimous Supreme Court decision behind it.
We won. The other guys backed down. We passed the word to a few other web sites being similarly threatened, and the attornies ran like vampires in sunlight.
But this _simple_ of an example, where a common and expected phrase becomes part of a "database", shows how HR 3261 can be applied to us all if it should pass.
This bill needs to be stopped...not just for the threat to the internet, but to basic research, to common students trying to do term papers, to authors trying to write, to even repeating breaking news from a web site or the TV.
Re:Been There, Done That, Must Fight (Score:1)
Re:Been There, Done That, Must Fight (Score:2)
Not to mention that it is most likely unconstitutional, given that Feist was heavily influenced by the copyright & patent clause of the US Constitution. The Bill also lacks the fair use clause present in the Copyright provisions in the US Code.