Re: copyright under U.S. and Spanish law

On Fri, 8 Oct 1999, Jeroen Hellingman <jehe[_at_]kabelfoon.nl> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 8 Oct 1999, Colin Seeger <seeger[_at_]ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > Similarly, the ABC here made specially treated, digitised copies
> > of public domain 78's and acquired a new copyright in the sound
> > recordings because they improved the sonics -- removing the
> > hiss etc.
>
> Quite true, but here they did some "creative" work, and ofcourse, it
> doesn't change the public domain status of the original, to which I
> can still do exactly the same, without looking at the ABC remastered
> stuff, and come up with something virtually indistinguisable (without
> special tools, that is) making the claim of "creativity" dubious,
> because the change you get something the same out of a creative
> process is virtually zero.
>
> > By analogy, the same could apply to a microfich. I think. Maybe.
>
> Maybe, but that would still not change the PD status of the texts thus
> microfilmed, and I can still enter it in a database, and use it freely.

Agree on both points, with the caveat that the Oz act does nto have "obviousness" or "creativeness/novelty" as tests. Originality is the key test assumiing all the "qualifying person" etc tests are OK.

CS.

"Galvanising Ideas"

Colin Seeger, Consultant, Management of Intellectual Property. P.O Box 3227, Tamarama, Sydney, Australia 2026 Tel: (61) (02) 9365 1186, Fax (61) (02) 9365 1286 <seeger[_at_]ozemail.com.au> Received on Tue Oct 12 1999 - 13:12:42 GMT