Top Banner
Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008 Facts and Compilations Randal C. Picker Leffmann Professor of Commercial Law The Law School The University of Chicago 773.702.0864/[email protected] Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker. All
60

Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

Dec 26, 2014

Download

Documents

Hondafanatics

 
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

Class 4Copyright, Spring, 2008

Facts and Compilations

Randal C. PickerLeffmann Professor of Commercial Law

The Law School

The University of Chicago

773.702.0864/[email protected] © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker. All Rights Reserved.

Page 2: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 2

Feist

Rural Telephone Service the local phone company in northwest

Kansas Provide service, assign phone numbers, get

all of the info as a byproduct of those activities

Required by law to issue phone book

Page 3: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 3

Feist

Distribute phone books: free to consumers, charge companies to be in Yellow Pages

Feist Publications Entrant into area-wide phone book market Struck deal with 10 of 11 to license listings;

Rural refused Feist got names from phone book; sought to

verify listings; did most not all

Page 4: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 4

Legal “Facts” in Feist

“Two Well-Established Propositions” Facts are not copyrightable Compilations of facts are copyrightable

Page 5: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 5

Copyright’s Incentives

Do we need to give Rural a copyright in the phone listings to incentive it to issue the phone book?

Page 6: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 6

Facts and Copyright

Single Facts Start with Sec. 102(b):

In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.

Page 7: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 7

35 USC 101

Inventions patentable Whoever invents or discovers any new and

useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.

Page 8: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 8

Facts as Discoveries

Putting the language to one side Authors as discovering facts, not creating

them Facts as existing independent of the author,

hence no origination

Page 9: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 9

Originality and the Constitution

The Congress shall have the Power . . . To promote the progress of science and the

useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

(Art. I, § 8, cl. 8)

Page 10: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 10

Groups of Facts: Compilations

The definition of compilation in Sec. 101: A “compilation” is a work formed by the

collection and assembling of preexisting materials or of data that are selected, coordinated, or arranged in such a way that the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship.

Page 11: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 11

Groups of Facts: Compilations

Sec. 103(a) The subject matter of copyright as specified

by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works, but protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully.

Page 12: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 12

Groups of Facts: Compilations

Sec. 103(b) The copyright in a compilation or derivative

work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material.

Page 13: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 13

Groups of Facts: Compilations

The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material.

Page 14: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 14

What is Copyrightable in a Compilation?

S/C/A Selection Coordination Arrangement

Page 15: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 15

The Heart of Copyright

Hard work (“sweat of the brow”) v. originality Feist finds originality to be a constitutional

requirement for copyright protection by Congress Raises difficult issues about the ability of

Congress to protect merely hard work creations, even under, say, the Commerce Clause

Page 16: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

Understanding “Facts”

Two Examples The “real” story of John Dillinger The SAT

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 16

Page 17: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 17

The Fictional Dillinger

Hypo Nash writes a novel setting forth an

alternative fictional account of the notorious John Dillinger’s life

CBS makes TV episode of that Nash alleges copyright infringement: does

he win?

Page 18: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

Answer

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 18

Page 19: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 19

Nash v. CBS (7th Cir. 1990)

Core Facts Nash publishes books describing what he

believes actually happened to John Dillinger Claims this to be “fact;” “the truth” CBS broadcasts an episode of Simon and

Simon that incorporates some of Nash’s facts

Nash claims a copyright violation: does he win?

Page 20: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 20

Answer

Page 21: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 21

Cultural Facts?

The Seinfeld Aptitude Test: Level 1 To impress a woman, George passes

himself off as: (a) a gynecologist (b) a geologist (c) a marine biologist (d) a meterologist

Page 22: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 22

Castle Rock Entertainment (2nd Cir. 1998)

Unprotectable facts under Feist? Instead, original expression? Says the Court

Page 23: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 23

Legit and Illegitimate Use: Can’t Copy

Page 24: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 24

Legit and Illegitimate Use: Can Use Ideas to Create New

Expressions

Page 25: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 25

Merger: When Only One Expression of an Idea is

Possible

No Copyright in Original Expression

Page 26: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 26

Merger

The Merger Doctrine “It has long been well-established that, in

order to protect the immunity of ideas from private ownership, when the expression is essential to the statement of the idea, the expression also will be unprotected, so as to insure free public access to discussion of the idea”

Page 27: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 27

CCC v. Maclean

Core Facts M publishes The Red Book

Expert predictions of used-car prices over the next six weeks

8 times per year, three regional versions, plus Wisconsin version

Page 28: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 28

CCC v. Maclean

CCC Services VINGuard Valuation Service

• Average of Red Book and Blue Book figures Computerized Valuation Service

• CCC’s independent figure• Average of Red and Blue• Red alone

Copyright infringement?

Page 29: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

Two Things at Stake

The Single Number Generate by M “We predict that a 2002 Red Honda accord

with 70,000 miles on it will sell for $19,500 over the 8 weeks.”

The Compilation How does M select/coordinate/arrange

(SCA) the information?

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-08 Randal C. Picker 29

Page 30: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 30

Pure Data, All Data

Hypo Maclean collects data on actual car sales M publishes The Red Book consisting of

that data Chicago: 2002 Honda Accord, 45,000 miles,

fully-loaded, $22,500 Line by line

CCC copies it all: infringement?

Page 31: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 31

Answer

Page 32: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 32

Just Averages

Hypo Maclean collects data on actual car sales M publishes The Red Book consisting of

averages by car type All Chicago sales of 2002 Honda Accords,

$22,500 on average CCC copies the averages: infringement?

Page 33: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 33

Answer

Page 34: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 34

Average “Predictions”

Hypo M calculates averages by car type

All Chicago sales of 2002 Honda Accords, $22,500 on average

M publishes The Red Book consisting of predictions of future used car values

2002 Honda Accord in Chicago: $22,500

Page 35: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 35

Average “Predictions”

M never releases raw data or averages but we learn from disgruntled employee how predictions are made

CCC copies the predictions: infringement?

Page 36: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 36

Answer

Page 37: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 37

Expert Predictions

Hypo M calculates averages by car type

All Chicago sales of 2002 Honda Accords, $22,500 on average

M publishes The Red Book consisting of predictions of future used car values

Take average, $22,500; study, think, opine: $23,522

Page 38: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 38

Expert Predictions

CCC copies the predictions: infringement?

Page 39: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 39

Answer

Page 40: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 40

Answer

Page 41: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 41

Pure Data, All Data

Hypo Universe of facts exists From that universe, Maclean collects data

on actual car sales M publishes The Red Book consisting of

that data Chicago: 2002 Honda Accord, 45,000 miles,

fully-loaded, $22,500

Page 42: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 42

Pure Data, All Data

CCC copies it all: M alleges infringement, not of the facts but of the compilation that the Red Book represents

Yes? No?

Page 43: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 43

Groups of Facts: Compilations

The definition of compilation in Sec. 101: A “compilation” is a work formed by the

collection and assembling of preexisting materials or of data that are selected, coordinated, or arranged in such a way that the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship.

Page 44: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 44

And the Compilation?

S/A/C Selection, arrangement, coordination

How Should that Apply Here? All cars v. some cars? U.S. cars v. foreign

cars? Frequency? Location?

Page 45: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 45

CCC’s Position

The Red Book S/A/C consists of ideas: “Given the nature of compilations, it is

almost inevitable that the original contributions of the compilers will consist of ideas. Originality in selection, for example, will involve the compiler's idea of the utility to the consumer of a limited selection from the particular universe of available data. …

Page 46: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 46

CCC’s Position

“In other compilations, the original contribution of the compiler will relate to ideas for the coordination, or arrangement of the data.”

What does M have that is protectable?

Page 47: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 47

The Approach in Kregos Identify the Right Level of Abstraction

“In one sense, every compilation of facts can be considered to represent a merger of an idea with its expression. Every compiler of facts has the idea that his particular selection of facts is useful. If the compiler's idea is identified at that low level of abstraction, then the idea would always merge into the compiler's expression of it. Under that approach, there could never be a copyrightable compilation of facts.”

Page 48: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 48

The Approach in Kregos

Identify the Right Level of Abstraction Kregos created form that relied on nine

baseball statistics to predict the outcome of a game

The idea here?: [T]he general idea that statistics can be

used to assess pitching performance rather than the precise idea that his selection yields a determinable probability of outcome.

Page 49: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 49

Ideas and the Merger Doctrine

Are the Maclean predictions ideas (unprotectable under 102(b)) or expressions (protectable under 102(a))? Both?

Is the particular grouping that Maclean puts forward an idea or an expression? Both?

What does idea mean in 102(b)?

Page 50: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 50

Defining the Idea/Defining the Expression

What is the idea here? What is the expression? “We should have a book of predictions of

used-car prices.” “We should have experts who should consider

fourteen factors in predicting used-car prices.” “We predict a 2002 Honda Accord should sell

for $22,500.”

Page 51: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 51

Compilation Analysis in the Case

Says the Second Circuit: “We find that the selection and arrangement

of data in the Red Book displayed amply sufficient originality to pass the low threshold requirement to earn copyright protection. This originality was expressed, for example, in Maclean’s division of the national used car market into several regions … .”

Page 52: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 52

Compilations and Merger

Red Book S/A/C Footnote 7:

“This selection includes far fewer than all extant options, and presents them in a manner that furnishes a single valuation to cover the particular option in numerous different vehicles. The editors make these choices to accommodate the practical space limitations imposed by the book’s format, while providing the information most likely to satisfy customers’ needs.”

Page 53: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 53

Issues

Does this give Maclean a monopoly over this format?

Isn’t the merger doctrine designed to prevent exactly that?

Page 54: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 54

The Number of Expressions Possible (Again)

Why should the number of potential expressions matter for the question of the copyrightability of a particular expression? We raised this in Baker v. Selden (seen as

important) Also in Lotus (less important) Could matter, easily, for compilations

Page 55: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 55

Two Legal Paths

Version 1: Limited Number of Expressions Deny copyright to these expressions This is the merger doctrine: idea and

expression are one

Page 56: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 56

Two Legal Paths

Version 2: Limited Number of Expressions Says Nothing About Copyrightability of Particular Expression Copyright the first Not a blocking position given our rules

regarding independent creation

Page 57: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 57

Two Legal Paths

When second author independently creates same expression—as will certainly occur if idea and expression inevitably are the same—we will give second author a copyright on her work as well

Independent creation tests whether idea and expression are actually one

Which path should we choose?

Page 58: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 58

Two Legal Paths Evidentiary issues?

Given limited number of expressions, how will we separate copying from independent creation?

Clean Room Design? Can we run a “clean room” process with the

right level of abstraction? “We want a book of used-car price

predictions: go design one for us.”

Page 59: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 59

Two Legal Paths

Shakespeare and the monkeys? Those in the clean room will hit on the Red

book, eventually If person selecting has seen the Red book,

can just choose it Person making choice must be untainted as

well

Page 60: Class 4 Copyright, Spring, 2008

April 10, 2023 Copyright © 2005-07 Randal C. Picker 60

Two Legal Paths

Need to be able to move up one level of abstraction to avoid exposure to first expression

Merger and Entry Barriers Should we understand merger as

preventing the entry barriers that would result from the higher costs of clean-room independent creation?