Well, I spent two hours reading Nimmer on Copyrights this afternoon, really exciting stuff. Not!
Nimmer is eight large volumes. I didn't even dent the surface. However, I am of the opinion that
you were closer to the truth than I was this afternoon, so consider this an apology. Having wiped
the black feathers from my mouth , this is some of what I found:
1. The publication is copyrightable.
2. Selling the publication does not equate with placing the information in the public
domain. Bob loses no rights by selling the publication to libraries or subscribers.
3. Paraphrasing will not protect one from infringement proceedings. This is especially
true where the paraphrase is substantial. If the paraphrase is a result of the publication, i.e. the
publication is the source of the paraphrase, you probably infringed.
There are, however, defenses that would come into play, especially on the internet. These
defenses are complex and I simply did not have enough time to absorb them to a degree that I feel
comfortable in discussing them.
While I am not advising anyone, personally, if the information is not in the public domain, I
will think twice before using it. DISCLAIMER: This was not meant to be a legal opinion, you should
not make any decisions as a result of this post. If you have any questions regarding copyright law,
see your local intellectual property attorney.
Now, back to Utek.
Bill |
