> Can someone supply me with a date/reference for this
> decision [Feist], and any short analysis of its meaning and
> any limitations.
>
> Ron B. Thomson
> Director of Publications
> Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies
> Toronto, Canada M5S 2C4
Ron,
The following is the cite to the "Feist" decision:
Feist Publications Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 111 S.Ct. 1282, 2 C.C.H. Computer Cases Para 46,423 (1991).
It is available in any Toronto law library (Osgoode, UofT). It does not appear to be applicable to your fact situation however.
Feist decided that under American copyright law ordinary telephone book listings were not protected by copyright. Copyright law protects creative expression and the U.S. Supreme Court decided that there was no creative expression (ie: no creative selection or arrangement) involved in compiling a standard list of names and telephone numbers. It was held conclusively in the U.S. that there is no copyright protection simply for the hard work (or sweat of the brow) put into compiling the directory.
Whether Feist will be followed in Canada is unclear. In 1994 The Canadian Copyright Act was amended to change the definition of "compilation" to mean "...a work resulting from the selection and arrangement of literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works...". This new definition has not yet been considered by Canadian courts. Canadian courts have historically used "sweat of the brow" as one of the indicia in determining whether copyright protection would be afforded to a compilation. The effect the new definition will have on Canadian copyright law is the subject of considerable academic debate.
I hope this helps.
E-Mail: DADietrich[_at_]SmithLyons.ca
Voice: (416) 369-4632
Fax: (416) 369-6178
Smith, Lyons, Torrance, Stevenson & Mayer
40 King Street West
Toronto, Ontario
Canada, M5H 3Z7
Received on Thu Oct 26 1995 - 15:02:45 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:18 GMT