We must determine the degree of creativity (and, hence, usability) on a case-by-case basis.
We must determine the degree of creativity (and, hence, usability) on a case-by-case basis.Since the United States law does not recognize the sweat of the brow doctrine, the amount of labor that goes into producing lists and compilations is not our concern.The following examples provide some guidance on the kinds of content that would typically be considered "discovery" and, hence, public domain.Tags: Does Extended Essay Word Count Include AbstractCollege Application Essay For Pharmacy SchoolCheck Paper For PlagiarismOpinion Essays EslWaste Paper TerminologyCrooks And Lennie EssayMeaning Of A Business PlanSolving Statics Problems
If selection and arrangement are creative, we cannot use the same selection and arrangement of our source, but might have to add or remove elements and rearrange content into a new work.
Wikipedia is legally bound by the copyright laws of the United States. § 102, copyright laws in the United States protect original works of authorship in any medium while leaving open to the public the ideas, procedures, processes, systems, methods of operation, concepts, principles and discoveries contained in such works.
To comply with those laws, we may freely reproduce only works that are either not protected by copyright (whether that's because copyright has expired, or because the material was never eligible for copyright protection) or works released under a suitable free license. (See Idea-expression divide.) Discoveries (facts) are not copyrightable, but compilations often are.
With lists and compilations, we sometimes face challenges in determining whether the material is eligible for copyright and, if so, how we might use it. Copyright doesn't only govern fiction; an historical essay may be as much an original work of authorship as a purely speculative science fiction novel.
You are really only safe if the list is purely formulaic." In considering whether a list or compilation is copyrightable, we have to look first at its nature.
Are we talking about facts ("discovery") or opinion? Patry points out, the law protects "compilations of things expressed as a value judgment".The author of each has wide latitude in choosing what to say and how to say it.Likewise, a list or compilation may be extremely creative.Copyright does not protect facts, but it does protect opinion.If a source is based on "value judgments", it may be protected by copyright, even if it looks very similar to fact.After making sure content clears these criteria, it should be checked further against the below.) If the content in the source list is a "value judgment", or if there is plausible reason to believe it may be, we cannot treat it like public domain material.Rather, we must limit our reproduction of the material just as we do reproduction of other copyrighted content.When we want to copy information from lists and compilations, we have to first figure out if they are protected by copyright.Copyright in a list may exist in the content of the list or in the way that the content was selected and arranged.Instead, we consider two factors: The Wikimedia Foundation's associate counsel wrote in January 2011, "Unless you know the criteria involved in creating the list, it is impossible to even gauge the potential of a court finding that it warrants copyright protection.And unfortunately, even if you do know the criteria, it is very hard to predict what a court will say (especially because the courts vary in their opinions in different circuits on this matter) when there is a degree of creativity involved.