Re: Re: music playlists

>Am I missing something?

In playlists and recipes, you are comparing apples and oranges (Apple iTunes and duck l'orange?)

Selection and arrangement refers to the protectible aspects of a compilation. An iTunes playlist is a compilation, i.e. a selection and arrangement of someone else's songs, and enjoys "thin" protection, limited to the original selection and arrangement.

A recipe for duck l'orange is not a compilation -- it is a formula; and its protectibility does not turn on the selection and arrangement of ingredients (the formula), however creative (read 'inventive' for 'creative' in the context of an unprotected method, process or formula); but rather on whether there is originality in the expression (the narrative) of the unprotected formula.

John

>I am reading with interest the responses to my original post about
>potential copyright protection for playlists. I think the recipe
>cases are a good test for the distinction that is troublesome here;
>that is, does copyright law say that facts aren't protected but
>creative expression or arrangement of facts may be (although that
>protection is "thin"), or is the correct statement of the
>controlling rule that facts are not protected, but that creative
>SELECTION or arrangement of facts may be. Once you expand
>protection to SELECTION, you have thrown a real monkey wrench into
>the analysis and, I believe, are completely at sea. The recipe
>cases- and I have read most of them-are a perfect example. Despite
>the somewhat conflicting posts about copyrightability of recipes, I
>think it is pretty clear that the list of ingredients and amounts
>are not protected and can be copied, but that recipes with creative
>expression (i.e. a lot of textual description) may enjoy some
>protection, just like any other text. But here's the rub: the list
>of ingredients and amounts could have resulted from incredible
>creativity and experience, yet I do not believe that any amount of
>such creativity makes the list of ingredients subject to copyright
>protection. Am I missing something?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: John [mailto:jfnbl[_at_]earthlink.com]
>Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 3:11 PM
>To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
>Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: music playlists
>
>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Steven Jamar <sjamar[_at_]law.howard.edu>
>>Date: Friday, April 1, 2005 4:25 pm
>>Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: music playlists
>>
>>> recipes are not copyrightable.
>>
>>Says who?
>
>Let's be specific. A recipe, qua formula, is not copyrightable. It's
>expression, by Julia Childs for example, may well be -- subject to
>merger doctrine limitations.
>
>John Noble
>
>#############################################################
>This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.
>To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org>
>To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org>
>To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org>
>To postpone your subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org>
>Send administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
>
>Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at
><https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
>
>#############################################################
>This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.
>To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org>
>To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org>
>To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org>
>To postpone your subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org>
>Send administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
>
>Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at
><https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
Received on Thu Apr 07 2005 - 00:15:31 GMT