Re: copyrighting of numbers

On Wed, 6 May 1998, Alan D. Sugarman <sugarman[_at_]hyperlaw.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/1/98, Terry Carroll <carroll[_at_]tjc.com> wrote:
> >
> > In this sense, database protection is no different than trademark
> > protection. Neither are authorized by the copyright clause, but because
> > they're not within the scope of the clause, can be empowered by other
> > clauses.
> >
> > Feist is kind of a catch-22 here: The core holding of Feist, that a
> > database is not within the scope of the copyright clause, is precisely
> > what permits protection authorized by another clause.
>
> This logic has always escaped me. The Supreme Court said there was not
> enought originality in Fiest. So Congress responds with a database bill
> that provides copyright like protection in the absence of originality.
> Following the logic of the analysis of supporters of the bill, under the
> Commerce Clause, Congress could then enact legislation providing copyright
> like protection to any and all types of non-creative non-original works.
> Thus, the requirements of the Copyright Clause mean nothing.

The requirements of the Copyright Clause indeed mean nothing for a statute that was not enacted under that clause and that deals with subjecte matter that by definition is outside of that clause.

Similarly, the Copyright Clause does not prevent Congress from enacting trademark laws.

> > 2. If the U.S. is a signatory to a database protection treaty, under
> > the treaty clause, Congress is empowered to enact legislation pursuant
> > to the treaty under Holland v. Missouri and its progeny. This is
> > another distinction from the bankruptcy case, where there was no treaty
> > basis to support the passage of nonuniform bankruptcy laws.
>
> So, this means that EEC the State Department in negotiating treaties can
> walk around the Consitution?

I don't know what you mean by "walk around the Contitution." There is no Constitutional prohibition against protecting things other than writings of authors.

--
Terry Carroll       |    "'Reprehensible' is just a five-syllable
Santa Clara, CA     |    word for 'scumbag.'"
carroll[_at_]tjc.com     |               - U.S. Congressman
Modell delendus est |                 Christopher Cox (R-Cal.)