Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Fiest Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service case brief

Fiest Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service
499 U.S. 340, 111 S.Ct. 1282, 113 L.Ed.2d 358 (1991)

Note:  This is one of the most important and dense copyright cases in a textbook on copyright.  Pay close attention to the intricacies of this particular case, as well as the rules that the court addresses.  Chances are, this case will factor into any Copyright Law final exam.  I have taken this into consideration as I made this particular case brief.  Further, If you are to review any particular case before a copyright course final, I recommend you read this particular case and fully understand it.

FACTS

-Copyright of to telephone directory white pages.
-Used “fake addresses” which were also copied.


RULES
-Facts are not copyrightable; compilations of facts generally are.
“No author may copyright his ideas or the facts he narrates.”
“Facts and discoveries are not themselves subject to copyright protection.  Compilations of facts are within the subject matter of copyright.”
⇒ Why facts are not copyrightable:  The sine qua non of copyright is originality.  To qualify for copyright protection, a work must be original to the author.

⇒ To qualify for copyright protection, a work must be original to the author.  Original, as the term is used in copyright, means only that the work was independently created by the author and that it possesses at least some minimal degree of creativity.
⇒ A work may be original even though it closely resembles other works so long as the similarity is fortuitous, not the result of copying.  
Originality is a constitutional requirement.
⇒ No one may claim originality to FACTS.  This is because facts do not owe their origin to an act of authorship.  The first person to find and report a particular fact has not created the fact; he or she has merely discovered its existence.  Facts may not be copyrighted and are part of the public domain available to every person.
⇒FACTUAL COMPILATIONS may possess the requisite originality.
-Even a directory that contains absolutely no protectable written expression, only facts, meets the constitutional minimum for copyright protection if it features an original selection or arrangement.
-
The mere fact that a work is copyrighted does not mean that every element of a work may be protected.  Copyright protection may extend only to those components of a work that are original to the author.
-Copyright in a factual compilation is thin.  A subsequent compiler remains free to use the facts contained in another’s publication to aid in preparing a competing work, so long as the competing work does not feature the same selection and arrangement.
“No matter how much original authorship the work displays, the facts and ideas it exposes are free for the taking... The very same facts and ideas may be divorced from the context imposed by the author, and restated or reshuffled by second comers, even if the author was the first to discover the facts and propose the ideas.”
Sweat of the Brow: The primary objective of copyright is NOT to reward the labor of authors, but to promote the progress of science and the useful arts. Idea/expression Dichotomy:  Copyright assures authors the right to their original expression, but encourages others to build freely upon the ideas and information conveyed by a work.
Originality Requirement of a Compilation:  Facts are never original, so the compilation author can claim originality, if at all, only in the way the facts are presented.
⇒Novelty is not required.  Originality requires only that the author make the selection or arrangement independently (i.e., without copying that selection or arrangement from another work), and that it display some minimal level of creativity.
-Even if a work qualifies as a copyrightable compilation, it receives only limited protection.  That copyright protects ONLY the author’s original contributions -- not the facts or information conveyed.
The copyright in a compilation 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.⇒ Copyright is not a tool by which a compilation author may keep others from using the facts or data he/she has collected.
-Copyright protects only the elements that owe their origin to the compiler - the selection, coordination, and arrangement of facts.
[Copyright requires originality, facts are never original, copyright in a compilation is copyrightable only to the extent that it features an original selection, coordination, or arrangement.]

ANALYSIS
-Court states that Fiest took from Rural’s directory a substantial amount of factual information; copied the names, towns, numbers of 1309 of Rural’s subscribers.
⇒ Not all copying is copyright infringement.
To establish infringement, two elements must be proven: (1) ownership of a valid copyright, and (2) copying of constituent elements of the work that are original.
“These bits of information are uncopyrightable facts; they existed before Rural reported them and would have continued to exist if Rural had never published a telephone directory.
-Selection, coordination, and arrangement of Rural’s white pages do not satisfy originality requirement; are entirely typical.  End product is a garden variety white pages, devoid of even the slightest trace of creativity.
-Rural required to create directory by state law.

Holding:  Great praise may be due to Rural for their industry and enterprise in publishing their directory, yet the law does not contemplate rewarding them for “sweat of the brow”.

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Ins and Outs of Class Action Lawsuits: A Comprehensive Guide

Sometimes, you may buy a product only to find it defective. To make it worse, your search for the product reveals mass complaints. You can ...