nach oben

Erschienen in:

2017 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

6. Feist Standard in the Threshold Assigned to AOIC

verfasst von : Indranath Gupta

Erschienen in: Footprints of Feist in European Database Directive

Verlag: Springer Singapore

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Harmonization of the threshold of copyright protection (author’s own intellectual creation) for databases under Article 3 resembles the standard developed in Feist decision. Following the impact of Feist, there have been positive developments such as freeing of factual information available in public domain. Examples suggest that producers are interested in improving the presentation of factual contents in compilations. By virtue of this arrangement, their directories are copyrightable.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Threshold of Author’s Own Intellectual Creation

Nächstes Kapitel Uncertainties with Sui Generis Database Right: Negative Interpretation of Feist

Infra section 6.2.

Feist Publications v Rural Telephone Service, 499 US 340 (1991).

Supra section 5.3.

Case C-604/10 Football Dataco Ltd v Yahoo! UK Ltd [2012] ECDR 10, 194 (Football Dataco).

Feist Publications (n 3) 358.

ibid.

Case C-304/07 Directmedia Publishing GmbH v Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg [2008] ECR I-7565; Editions Législatives v. Le Serveur Administratif, Thierry Ehrmann and others [2005] ECDR 14; [2011] EWCA Civ 330; [2011] 1 WLR 3044; Feist Publications (n 3).

Cases after Feist decision in the US followed the guidelines of Feist, supra section 4.4.

Feist Publications (n 3) 362.

Supra section 5.3.

ibid.

Council Directive of 1996/9/EC of 27 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases [1996] OJ L 77/20 (Council Directive 96/9/EC).

Supra section 3.3.

Victor Lalli Enterprises Inc. v. Big Red Apple Inc., 936 F 2d 671 (2nd Cir 1991) 673.

ibid.

[2011] EWCA Civ 330, [2011] 1 WLR 3044.

If any publisher were to design a similar directory as created by Rural there would be no other way than to strictly follow the procedure followed by Rural in Feist decision, Feist Publications (n 3).

This is contrary to new line of jurisprudence as proposed in the first draft proposal of the Database Directive, Commission, ‘Proposal for a Council Directive on the legal protection of databases’ COM (92) 24 final (COM (92) 24 final), para [2.3.3].

[2011] EWCA Civ 330, [2011] 1 WLR 3044.

[2002] ECDR 3.

SA Credinfor v. Artprice.com [2006] ECDR 15 (Artprice).

Feist Publications (n 3) and supra section 5.3.

ibid.

Football Dataco Ltd v Brittens Pools Ltd [2010] EWHC 841(Ch) Sections 83–90 (Football Dataco 2); This is an objective requirement unlike the subjective requirement under author’s right system, Daniel J Gervais, ‘Feist goes global: A comparative analysis of the notion of originality in copyright law’ (2002) 49(4) Journal of Copyright Society of the US 949, 952.

For instance in France, Thomas K Dreier, ‘Authorship and New Technologies from the Viewpoint of Civil Law Tradition’ (1995) 26(6) IIC 990, 997–999.

Football Dataco 2 (n 25) para [22].

ibid.

Feist Publications (n 3).

ibid 342.

Football Dataco 2 (n 25), para [15].

ibid paras [12] – [21].

Feist Publications (n 3) 363.

Football Dataco (n 5) 362.

Feist Publications (n 3) 363.

ibid 363.

Football Dataco 2 (n 25), para [44].

Feist Publications (n 3); Football Dataco 2 (n 25).

Football Dataco (n 5) 193-194.

ibid.

Football Dataco 2 (n 25) paras [89]–[90].

Feist Publications (n 3); Football Dataco (n 5).

Football Dataco 2 (n 25), para [86].

ibid.

Feist Publications (n 3).

ibid 363.

Selection would entail modicum of creativity as prescribed in the Feist case, Feist Publications (n 3) 346.

Rural compiled the alphabetical list of all its subscribers as per statutory requirement, Feist Publications (n 3) 342.

Case C-304/07 Directmedia Publishing GmbH v Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg [2008] ECR I-7565.

Football Dataco 2 (n 25), para [86].

Stating that “…it is not consistent with other areas of copyright law if in fact originality for the purposes of database copyright was to include both a requirement as to [AOIC] and a quantitative requirement but in other areas not”, Mark Rodgers, ‘Case Comment: Football fixture lists and the Database Directive: Football Dataco Ltd v Brittens Pools Ltd’ (2010) 32(11) EIPR 593, 598.

Football Dataco 2 (n 25), para [86].

Feist Publications (n 3) 363-364.

Football Dataco 2 (n 25), para [22].

Supra section 6.1.

Commission, ‘Copyright and the Challenge of Technology’ (Green Paper) COM (88) 172 final (COM (88) 172 final); COM (92) 24 final.

‘DG Internal market and services working paper: First Evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC on the legal protection of databases’ (Commission of the European Communities, 12 December 2005) available at <http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/docs/databases/evaluation_report_en.pdf> (accessed 31 October 2016) (First Evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC), para [1.1].

COM (88) 172 final; COM (92) 24 final.

COM (88) 172 final, s 6.3.

ibid, para [6.3.2].

ibid, para [6.2.1].

ibid, s 6.1.

COM (88) 172 final, paras [6.2.1] and [6.3.1].

Working programme of the Commission in the field of copyright and neighbouring rights. Follow-up to the Green Paper. COM (90) 584 final, 17 January 1991, 18 (COM (90) 584 final), paras [6.2.1] and [6.2.2].

ibid, para [6.2.2].

ibid, para [6.3.2].

ibid, para [6.2.2].

COM (92) 24 final, para [2.2.4].

ibid, para [3.1.10].

ibid, para [5.3.1].

ibid, para [2.1].

ibid, para [2.2.3].

ibid, para [2.2.4].

ibid, paras [2.3.1] – [2.3.3].

ibid, para [2.3.3].

COM (88) 172 final.

COM (92) 24 final, s 3.

“Collections of literary or artistic works such as encyclopedias and anthologies which, by reason of the selection and arrangement of their contents, constitute intellectual creations shall be protected as such, without prejudice to the copyright in each of the works forming part of such collections.”, Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Work available at <http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/text.jsp?file_id=283698#P85_10661> (accessed 7 November 2009).

COM (92) 24 final, para [2.2.4].

ibid, paras [2.3.3] and [2.2.9]; Waterlow Directories v Reed Information Services [1992] FSR 409.

ibid.

[1992] FSR 409.

ibid.

COM (92) 24 final, para [2.2.5].

ibid, para [2.3.3].

ibid, paras [3.2.4] – [3.2.6].

ibid.

ibid, para [3.2.5].

ibid, paras [3.2.4] – [3.2.6].

ibid, para [3.2.6].

ibid, paras [3.2.4] – [3.2.6].

Feist Publications (n 3) 345.

Infra section 7.3.

Feist Publications (n 3).

This led to the development of the idea behind the enactment of the database right, Infra chapter 7.

ibid, para [2.3.3].

COM (88) 172 final.

COM (90) 584 final.

100

Feist Publications (n 3).

101

Supra section 6.1; COM (92) 24 final, para [2.2.9].

102

Council Directive 1991/250/EEC of 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer programs [1991] OJL122/1.

103

Infra section 7.1.

104

COM (92) 24 final, para [3.2.8].

105

ibid, para [2.2.3].

106

ibid, para [2.2.11].

107

COM (92) 24 final, para [2.2.11].

108

European Parliament Minutes of Proceedings of the sitting of 23 June 1993 on Part II – Texts adopted by the European Parliament [1993] OJC 194/3, para [2a].

109

Council Common Position 20/95/EC of 10 July 1995 with a view to adopting the Database Directive [1995] OJC 288/02.

110

COM (92) 24 final, para [3.2.5]; Supra section 5.1.

111

Supra chapter 5.

112

Council Directive 96/9/EC.

113

Feist Publications (n 3).

114

ibid 349.

115

ibid.

116

This argument runs counter to the thought connected to the fundamental argument of providing incentive to first database producer; First Evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC, s 2.

117

Feist Publications (n 3) 347; Miller v Universal City Studios, Inc 650 F.2d 1365 (5th Cir 1981) 1369.

118

Infra section 6.4.

119

[2011] EWCA Civ 330, [2011] 1 WLR 3044.

ibid, para [16].

ibid.

ibid.

Football Dataco 2 (n 25) para [82].

124

Feist Publications (n 3) 347; Miller (n 117) 1369.

Supra section 5.3.

ibid.

ibid.

[1916] 2Ch 601, 609.

ibid.

H Blacklock & Co Ltd v C Arthur Pearson Ltd [1915] 2 Ch, 376; Ladbroke v William Hill [1964] 1 WLR 273, 274.

131

ibid.

132

There is the barrier of high cost associated with the production of databases, Jerome H Reichman and Pamela Samuelson, ‘Intellectual Property Rights in data?’ (1997) 50(1) V and L Rev 51, 81.

133

[2011] EWCA Civ 330, [2011] 1 WLR 3044; Football Dataco (n 5).

134

COM (92) 24 final, para [2.3.3].

135

ibid.

136

Previously we have seen how producers in US have invested without a particular protection in place for databases, Supra section 4.3.

137

ibid.

138

COM (92) 24 final para [2.3.3].

139

First Evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC, s 2.

140

Based on argument of the structure; Supra section 2.3.

141

Comments on the concern with electronic databases (COM (92) 24 final), para [3.2.5].

142

ibid.

143

Football Dataco (n 5).

144

We have observed that there was no appreciable impact of Feist decision in Europe, Supra chapter 3.

145

Feist said no protection to mundane garden-variety telephone directories, which are arranged alphabetically, Football Dataco (n 5) 362.

146

Feist Publications (n 3).

147

In practical terms it is difficult to scan each and every page of a printed database. On the other hand if someone manages to bypass the TPM, it is easier to copy data from an electronic database. The type of TPM includes both access control mechanisms and copy control mechanisms. User id/Password that comes under the access control mechanism may be breached, although this is not the only kind of access control mechanism that may be used by a database producer. Other forms of access control mechanisms are encryption technologies, digital signatures etc., Aashit Shah, ‘UK’S Implementation of the Anti-Circumvention Provisions of the EU Copyright Directive: An analysis’ (2004) Duke Law and Technology Review 3.

148

Thomson Directories Ltd, Thomson local.com: Directory 2011-12 (2011).

149

There is little issue of frustration on the part of the user if the decision to include such selection or arrangement is market driven; This is again contrary to the proposition that “.the greater variety of classifications, the more frustrated the user of the yellow pages is likely to become” Jane C Ginsburg, ‘No “Sweat”? Copyright and the Protection of Works of Information after Feist v Rural’ (1992) 92(2) Colum L Rev 338, 345.

150

British Telecom, London South West 2011/2012: The Phone Book (2011).

151

ibid.

152

ibid.

153

This is contrary to what Rural had compiled in their telephone directory, Feist Publications (n 3).

154

This is an obvious outcome of any business strategy. Previously we have come across business strategy of Reed Elsevier, Supra section 4.3.

155

Going by the given threshold, it is expected that this selection would meet the AOIC threshold, Supra section 5.1.

156

Supra (n 154).

157

This is the similarity between two comprehensive databases of similar kind. As said in the Feist decision, “Notwithstanding a valid copyright, 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”. Feist Publications (n 3) 349.

158

ibid.

159

‘Reed Elsevier annual report 1997’ available at <http://www.reed-elsevier.com/investorcentre/reports%202007/Pages/1992-2001.aspx> (accessed 10 December 2010). (Reed Elsevier annual report 1997).

160

“…Arrangement of the compilation will have a bearing on the speed and ease with which the data can be assessed and hence it’s commercial success”, COM (88) 172 final, para [6.1.5].

161

ibid.

162

Justice O’Conner in Feist citing Nimmer said: “…arrang[ing] the collected data so that they may be used effectively by readers” Feist Publications (n 3) 340; Discussing usefulness as a primary concept for the compiler and helps in copyright protection, Alan L Durham, Speaking of the World: fact, opinion and the originality standard of copyright (2009) 33(3) Arizona State Law Journal 791, 155.

163

Feist Publications (n 3) 342.

164

ibid; Supra (n 154).

165

Consulted in chapter 4.

166

These facts, are contrary to the proposition that “for many post-Feist information compilations, the decision to add this kind of “value” may be driven more by a desire to achieve creative originality than by consumer demand”, Ginsburg (n 149) 347.

167

‘A hair and beauty guide’, ‘a menu guide for restaurants and takeaways’ and ‘a leisure, sport and tourism guide’.

168

One could arrange by first name (as done in Iceland), by address, by telephone number as well as by surname; From the comments of the reviewer.

169

This was expressed in the first draft proposal. It was further suggested that there would be less selection or arrangement in a comprehensive database, COM (92) 24 final, para [2.3.3].

170

Like the one developed by Rural in Feist Publications (n 3).

171

Reed Elsevier annual report 1997 (n 159).

ibid.

ibid.

ibid.

ibid.

Supra section 5.1.

Feist Publications (n 3) 349.

178

COM (92) 24 final, para [2.3.3].

179

US Copyright Office: Report on Legal Protection for Databases (August, 1997) available at <www.copyright.gov/reports/db4.pdf> (accessed 30 November 2016).

180

COM (92) 24 final, s 2.

181

The balance was questioned in the First Evaluation of the Directive, First Evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC, para [4.3].

182

Infra section 7.2.

183

The argument that Sui generis database right was an experiment, Robin Elizabeth Herr, Is the Sui Generis Right a Failed Experiment? A legal and Theoretical Exploration of How to Regulate Unoriginal Database Contents and Possible Suggestions for Reform (DJØF Publishing Copenhagen, Denmark 2008).

184

Mark J Davison, The legal protection of databases (Cambridge University Press Cambridge 2003) 51–102; Annemarie Beunen, Protection for databases: The European Database Directive and its effects in Netherlands, France and United Kingdom (Wolf Legal Publishers Leiden 2007) 3–14; Herr (n 183) 85–101.

ibid.

ibid.

ibid.

ibid; First Evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC, s 2.4.

189

ibid.

190

With the emergence of the electronic database market there was enough evidence present in the first draft proposal to show anxiety and apprehension, COM (92) 24 final, s 1–3.

191

There was such suggestion made in the First Evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC, s 6.

192

ibid, s 2.4.

193

ibid, s 5.3.

194

There was such argument made in the first evaluation report wherein the publishers said that there was increase in investments if not increase in number of electronic databases, ibid, s 4.1.3.

195

There was no evidence given by the publishers or suggested any alternative way to measure incentive amongst publishers, ibid.

196

COM (92) 24 final, para [2.3.3].

197

First Evaluation of Directive, 96/9/EC.

198

Questioning the balance, Estelle Derclaye, ‘Intellectual property rights on information and market power—comparing European and American protection of databases’ (2007) 38(3) IIC 275, 297.

199

Infra section 7.3.

200

Council Directive 96/9/EC.

201

Supra sections 7.2 and 7.3.

202

Gervais (n 25).

203

If one considers the time till the First Evaluation report in 2005, First Evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC.

Titel: Feist Standard in the Threshold Assigned to AOIC
verfasst von: Indranath Gupta
Verlag: Springer Singapore
Buch: Footprints of Feist in European Database Directive
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3980-5

Electronic ISBN: 978-981-10-3981-2

Copyright-Jahr: 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3981-2_6

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"