I would analogize play lists as being similar to recipes. Recipes are copyrightable as compilations. Nimmer makes reference to this, but the copyright is thin. Here, the play lists are being copied without authorization and, to the extent that they are copied as a whole, this raises a good question of whether verbatim copyright infringement has been committed and the thickness of the protection of said copyright. [106(1) being the right to reproduce and authorize the making of copies -- separate and apart from 106(3) -- the right to distribute and authorize the distribution of said copies (this would include "publishing"/making available to the public)).]
Lee Kim, Esq.
Patent Agent
Cohen & Grigsby, P.C.
11 Stanwix Street, 15th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Direct dial: 412-297-4969
FAX: 412-209-1965
E-mail: lkim[_at_]cohenlaw.com
"Webb, Jere"
<JMWEBB[_at_]stoel.com
> To
Sent by: "CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright &
"CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Intellectual Property"
Copyright & <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>
Intellectual cc
Property"
<CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cn Subject
i.org> [CNI-(C)] music playlists
03/30/2005 05:55
PM
Please respond to
"CNI-COPYRIGHT --
Copyright &
Intellectual
Property"
<CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cn
i.org>
Client operates an online music site where you can browse songs, add
tracks to your play list, and get suggestions for songs you might be
interested in. Copyright permissions are obtained. Client proposes
to have a bot "scrape" play lists from other music websites (these
are all over the web). They would not be published or distributed in
any way, but would merely go into a database that would be used to
analyze affinities or likely interests of listeners. Then when you
go to the site you will get suggestions on music that might be of
interest to you, much like amazon does with books. The question is,
does anybody think these play lists enjoy any copyright protection.
I conclude that they do not. No matter how creative the selection
process may be, the expression is just an an alphabetical list and
therefore covered by Feist v. Rural Communications (holding the white
pages of telephone book not subject to copyright protection and
rejecting the "sweat of the brow" theory of protection).
Any thoughts, cases etc, relevant to this issue.?
I am aware that my client may need to be concerned about website terms and conditions, which sometimes impose restrictions beyond what is protected by copyrights.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:54 GMT