Newspaper Articles Not Copyrightable In Slovakia 86
Yenya writes "In Slovakia, newspaper articles can be freely aggregated and archived, and are not worth copyright protection. The district court in Bratislava, Slovakia, stated in the case between news publishing house Ecopress and a news monitoring company Storin, that while the news articles manifests traces of creativity, it is not enough to be considered worth protecting the authors rights (English translation)."
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
causes damage to the posters reputation
If the poster wasn't AC, maybe
Re: (Score:3)
causes damage to the posters reputation
If the poster wasn't AC, maybe
Oh, no, that just means that everybody who ever posted as AC is is eligible for damages. Actually, this is a class action case!
In Slovakia.... (Score:2)
Your slashdot comments don't get copyright protection either.
Re:In Slovakia.... (Score:4, Insightful)
You sure? These comments are original works of me, my opinion, my creation.
You have to see the difference between information and creation. That Hydrogen is the lightest element in the periodic table is not copyrightable. It's information. Even if I create an elaborate statement that culminates in its essence in this and little else, there's no chance that I'll retain copyright of it. Because the main part of what I created is still just the information that hydrogen is the element with the least mass.
A fantasy story about various atoms coming together and having a party, while playing puns on their weight and some of their properties (and look how fat uranium looks, any more yellow cake and she's gonna blow!) is a different matter. That IS copyrightable.
Re:In Slovakia.... (Score:5, Funny)
You sure? These comments are original works of me, my opinion, my creation.
You have to see the difference between information and creation. That Hydrogen is the lightest element in the periodic table is not copyrightable. It's information. Even if I create an elaborate statement that culminates in its essence in this and little else, there's no chance that I'll retain copyright of it. Because the main part of what I created is still just the information that hydrogen is the element with the least mass.
A fantasy story about various atoms coming together and having a party, while playing puns on their weight and some of their properties (and look how fat uranium looks, any more yellow cake and she's gonna blow!) is a different matter. That IS copyrightable.
Does this mean I can't use the quote button?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does this mean I can't use the quote button?
There is a quote button?
FTFY, DMCA (Score:2)
You xxxx? These comments are xxxxxx works of xx, xx opinion, xx creation.
Xxx have to see the difference between xxxxxxx and xxxxxxx. That xxxxxxx is the lightest element in the periodic table is not xxxxxxxxxx. It's information. Even if I xxxxx an elaborate statement that culminates in xxx essence in this and little else, there's no chance that X'xx retain xxxxxxx of it. Because the main part of what I xxxxxx is still just the information that hydrogen is the element with the least mass.
A fantasy xxxxx about various xxxxxx coming together and having a party, while playing puns on xxxxx weight and some of their properties (and look how fat xxxxxx looks, any more yellow cake and she's gonna blow!) is a different matter. That IS xxxxxxxxx.
Does xxxx xxxx I can't use the xxxxx button?
FTFY, DMCA compatible now.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You sure? These comments are original works of me, my opinion, my creation.
You have to see the difference between information and creation. That Hydrogen is the lightest element in the periodic table is not copyrightable. It's information. Even if I create an elaborate statement that culminates in its essence in this and little else, there's no chance that I'll retain copyright of it. Because the main part of what I created is still just the information that hydrogen is the element with the least mass.
A fantasy story about various atoms coming together and having a party, while playing puns on their weight and some of their properties (and look how fat uranium looks, any more yellow cake and she's gonna blow!) is a different matter. That IS copyrightable.
Does this mean I can't use the quote button?
That joke is so derivative.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You seem confused. The copyright of facts and the copyright of newspaper articles are two distinct things.
Re:In Slovakia.... (Score:5, Funny)
You seem confused. The copyright of facts and the copyright of newspaper articles are two distinct things.
That may indeed be true in the US, where "facts" and "newspaper articles" definitely are two distinct things most of the time.
Re: (Score:2)
A fantasy story about various atoms coming together and having a party, while playing puns on their weight and some of their properties (and look how fat uranium looks, any more yellow cake and she's gonna blow!) is a different matter.
Ten copies, please. WHY WON'T YOU TAKE MY MONEY?!
Re: (Score:2)
Umm... 'cause I give it away for free? It's not like I think my creations are worth enough to actually charge people for the privilege of reading them.
Actually, I'm kinda glad they don't try to get compensation for immaterial damage...
Re: (Score:2)
Even if I create an elaborate statement that culminates in its essence in this and little else, there's no chance that I'll retain copyright of it. Because the main part of what I created is still just the information that hydrogen is the element with the least mass.
Not strictly true: if you wrote an elaborate statement to affirm that hydrogen is the element with the least mass you would probably have copyright *on the statement*, just not on the hydrogen fact. This is how you have copyright on e.g. science books, which are basically based on the explanation of facts (and why you can take said facts and put them on wikipedia, but you can't copy the actual phrasing of the book).
Manipulative wording (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's closer, but monopolizing the news is not a right. It's a privilege which may (or may not) be granted by the government.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually they do because Slashdot is hosted in the USA.
The implied license might be another hurdle though.
Re: (Score:2)
Czechoslovakia was not annexed in 1968; not any more than, say, Iraq was annexed by U.S. in 2003.
whose history survived last time? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not only Slovakia, I dimly remember that in our copyright laws there's an explicit note that news are not copyrightable. For the reason that they're news, not the creation of the newspapers.
Well, it MAY be different for the Sun or similar quality papers, where it might be an original work...
Because, they are not worth (Score:3, Insightful)
Most likely, they are not worth protection, because they are generally crap. Journalism is a dying art. All you get is poorly translated blurbs from AP/AFP/Reuters. With population of 5 millions is not worth attention of foreign reporters and the only case where I've seen local reporters to get to the bottom of the issue are some consumer-protection cases. Never in science, politics or corruption, etc. But who cares. Most people just want tabloid, so they get that.
I get better news coverage here, than from newspaper articles.
Re: (Score:2)
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Oh, wait...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Of course, whilst the news may be vitally important and exciting for nationals, it's likely to be of very little interest to foreigners. Whereas when things are happening in the US or Russia, even if we'd prefer it didn't affect us, we still have to wonder how far away the poor victim country will be and whether we'll get any fall-out.
Because they aren't worth it (Score:2, Funny)
The more likely explanation is that they are not worth protecting, because their quality is so low. Journalism is a dying art. Newspapers consist of poorly translated blurbs from AP/AFP/Reuters. With a population of 5 million, Slovakia does not receive much attention from the foreign press, and the only case where I've seen local reporters get to the bottom of an issue are in a few consumer-protection issues. Never in other important fields like science, politics, etc. But who cares. Most people just want a
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't really about the quality of the work, otherwise you could argue that all sorts of art is just crap and thus not worthy of copyright. Who would decide? The court in this case is basing their decision on the idea that merely reporting facts is not a significant enough "work" to qualify, in the same way that you can't copyright raw data like statistics or sports scores in most places.
Opinion pieces might be different because they are creative. Unfortunately 99% of the average newspaper is opinion rath
I live in Slovakia (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's why you have to organise and donate to the politicians first. Keep track of how much was donated and use that info as amo in case the US Media lobsters start to pay them off OR you could gather all the politicians and threaten them with mob and pitchforks.
Re: (Score:1)
Here in the EU (which Slovakia is a member of), "donating" to a politician is a serious crime (corruption) with several years of imprisonment as the punishment.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Does copyright law in Slovakia have the notion of fair use applied as it does in the U.S.? Without fair use of copyrighted materials as a middle ground you'd have a much harder time arguing that news articles can be copyrighted.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"I cannot imagine that many of our judges are educated enough in the modern issues of copyright in the virtual world to recognize the problem"
That's good for you: with regards of copyright notions, the more "luddites" the more probable the judge will reach a fair outcome.
There's absolutly *nothing* in the "virtual world" that means a damn with respect of copy rights except to muddy the waters.
"I have to say that in my opinion the judge is wrong"
With regards of court rules, the damn short letter makes a big
Re: (Score:1)
You're right, at least the article suggest so. It also says that the court disregarded some EC directives and previous cases based on them. Since precedents are not binding in our law system, it is free to do so, and the plaintiff will have to appeal the decision in a higher court.
In Slovakia... (Score:3)
Re:In Slovakia... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
No no no, in America copyright owns you. In Slovakia, copyright knows its place.
in the USA, sure. Most countries in in America are much healthier though.
Interesting (Score:4, Interesting)
There is plenty of creativity in journalism. In the US, journos exhibit creativity when they try to create two sides out of a one sided issue, conjures up non existent reasons for an illegal war [fair.org], or print outright works of fiction as fact [wikipedia.org].
Re:Interesting (Score:4, Informative)
When you say "illegal war", you mean "military activity not authorized authorized by congress?"
Because heres the huge irony of all these bashing statements about "Bushe's War" being illegal getting +5 interesting: All of Bush's military activity was explicitly authorized [wikipedia.org] by Congress, in one case by a landslide [wikipedia.org]. The huge irony here is that Obama voted "yea" for both.
The same, unfortunately, cannot be said for Obama, despite his vocal opposition to non-authorized military activity-- Libya was not approved by Congress (though it was by the UN; I guess that trumps constitutionality requirements in Obama's book).
To be clear, I am not against the intervention in Libya-- I can give Obama credit where credit is due; but there is some HUGE hypocrisy from a guy who stated
"The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."
and even more so from those who ignore Libya and continue blithely attacking Bush. At least Obama had the good sense to shut up about Bush's "Kinetic Military Actions" being unconstitutional; yall should take a page out of his book.
Re: (Score:1)
No, he means 'military action without a formal declaration of war as required by international law'.
Re: (Score:2)
My links didnt come through due to a bad copy-paste; you are right that Bush had no declaration of war, but that is not a constitutional requirement, and international law allows retaliation in self defense (which, it is argued, Afghanistan was).
Iraq was because Hussein refused to allow UN weapons inspectors in, along with an informant who claimed WMDs and bio / chem weapons were being stockpiled. You can argue that all day long, but basically everyone was for the Iraq invasion when it happened; It is poss
Re: (Score:2)
Um, the reason that "basically everyone" was for the Iraq invasion is because of a concerted effort made by the Bush administration to make a case for it. A case that was full of information that can be considered, at best, distortions and, at worst, outright lies. If you don't believe me, try watching the program "Bush's War" put out
Re: (Score:1)
"Obama did it, so it's ok"?
That's a compelling argument.
Great, now take it a step further! (Score:1)
while the news articles manifests traces of creativity, it is not enough to be considered worth protecting the authors rights
The same should apply to Hollywood movies, for the same reasons! :D
For now (Score:2)
Misleading conclusion (Score:1)
Slovakia, like most European countries, doesn't have a common law system. This means that precedents have very little significance, and next time someone claims a copyright on a news article, the court may decide differently.
Re: (Score:2)
Finally a test case (Score:5, Interesting)
Will this cause the total collapse of the Slovakian news business? My suspicion is "no".
Anyway, it will be interesting to see what happens, so finally there might be some (slightly) more objective evidence for those of us who are interested in how the current copyright laws encourage or discourage various economic endeavors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think you misunderstand "test case", here. I did not mean a legal test case. I meant an economic test case --- for that, it is sufficient to have just this one decision.
Re: (Score:2)
Copyright (by US definition, at least) does NOT cover facts or information but the "expression" of those facts or information (when it comes to news, this is how it applies -- can't copyright facts). So you can actually take any news story, take all the information out of it, write a new story based on those facts and you're fine -- no copyright violation.
With that, there's no reason to ask them to give up the copyright in that anyone that same day or anytime can take the information and share it with every
2 things (Score:2)
articles that are simplistic reporting of daily news are what has been ruled on. completely original investigative reporting is not affected. there is really very little creativity in slovak journalism. a lot of it is only one-sided rehashing of press releases.
slovakia does not have diversity in the journalism market. that is why piano media was able to get a foothold. hopefully, this will begin to eat away at the paywall and collusion piano media has created.
We could cut the copyright on newspaper articles (Score:5, Insightful)
... down to 5 or 10 days after publication, and it wouldn't kill the incentives of journalists to research and write the articles, or of newspapers to publish them. Nearly all of their monetary value is realized in the first 48 hours after publication.
Cutting the copyright short would also make it easier for newspapers to make their archives of old articles available. In America some newspapers get cockblocked by journalists suing to collect royalties again on years-old articles just because the article is republished in a different medium.
Felvidek (Score:1)
I ran a manual aggregator service but I stopped because I got paranoid with all the copyright as I paid for nothing. The site was not set up to earn any money and users got what they needed for free. So this news is welcome IMHO as news is news and should be free, notwithstanding the costs that a paper forks out which is basically recouped by advertising and edition sales. I never felt guilty about that, just the paranoia of copyright.
The Slovak model is interesting for another reason, that the newsprint me
Re: (Score:2)
Firstly, newspapers definitely don't side away from real issues... except that their definition of real issues isn't constantly poking the same stale issue, which is how both Slovak National Party and SMK, Most-Hid or whatever the hungarian party is at the moment get their votes.
Now, let's address things in turn.
I don't think i have ever seen Moravians se
Re: (Score:1)
Thank you for all the responses. It is very interesting to hear your collected views and I appreciate them.
Firstly, I do not have any issues with the Slovak peoples or their rights. My post was about contentious issues and possible Slovak government reactions to them based on practice
So: http://www.foruminst.sk/en/66/visual_bilingualism/0/research_on_usage_of_hungarian_language_in_southern_slovakia/1 [foruminst.sk] will give you a perspective on bilingual problems (English).
Dual Citizenship: I do not have the time at pres
Neither are Vowels, It Appears (Score:1)
(Obligatory Onion reference)
journalists stealing other stories.. (Score:1)
here in india (Score:1)