544:) included in a compilation are not protected even if the selection and arrangement are; specifically, the Supreme Court wrote, "Notwithstanding a valid copyright, a subsequent compiler remains free to use the facts contained in another's publication to aid in preparing a competing work, so long as the competing work does not feature the same selection and arrangement." The best approach in the latter case is to utilize an entirely different arrangement, one which is either a "mere mechanical grouping of data" or creative in patently different ways. In the former, we may need to vary the selection by drawing in additional information to form a compilation around a different criterion or to limit it substantially in a new and different way.
179:. Copyright doesn't only govern fiction; an historical essay may be as much an original work of authorship as a purely speculative science fiction novel. The author of each has wide latitude in choosing what to say and how to say it. Likewise, a list or compilation may be extremely creative. We must determine the degree of creativity (and, hence, usability) on a case-by-case basis.
207:
480:, § 16, the Second Circuit noted that for copyright protection to convey, arrangement ("the ordering or grouping of data into lists or categories") must be "original within the meaning of the copyright laws" ("go beyond the mere mechanical grouping of data as such, for example, the alphabetical, chronological, or sequential listings of data"). Just as the selection in
35:
98:
404:
copyrightable subjectivity in compilation, even if it doesn't say what factors were included in selecting. Where selection of facts is subjective and sufficiently creative ("businesses which seem sustainable"), copyright protection applies; where it is not ("every household with a phone in the region"), it does not.
552:
Beyond copyright, users should consider the licensing of the content they want to use. The
Wikimedia Foundation's associate counsel recommended in March 2011 that the use of even uncopyrightable lists be considered with regards to licensing agreements that may "bind the user/reader from republishing
412:
The following examples provide some guidance on the kinds of content that would typically be considered uncreative in selection. (Please remember that other copyrightable factors may still hamper free use of the source list or compilation. After making sure content clears this criteria, it should be
197:
The
Wikimedia Foundation's associate counsel wrote in January 2011, "Unless you know the criteria involved in creating the list, it is impossible to even gauge the potential of a court finding that it warrants copyright protection. And unfortunately, even if you do know the criteria, it is very hard
156:
Knowledge (XXG) is legally bound by the copyright laws of the United States. To comply with those laws, we may freely reproduce only works that are either not protected by copyright (whether that's because copyright has expired, or because the material was never eligible for copyright protection) or
106:
In order to comply with copyright policy, Wikipedians need to consider the creativity of compilations and lists before incorporating content from them. If they are creative in content (subjective "value judgments"), material taken from them may need to be limited to comply with fair use. If they are
496:
The following examples provide some guidance on the kinds of content that would typically be considered uncreative in arrangement. (Please remember that other copyrightable factors may still hamper free use of the source list or compilation. After making sure content clears this criteria, it should
556:
All editors on
Knowledge (XXG) should remember that they are individually responsible for their edits here and even if they are in compliance with site policy may encounter legal liability if they violate the law. Knowledge (XXG)'s policies are created by volunteers in a best effort to comply with
333:
article can comfortably mention the inclusion of the comic and its creators on multiple "value judgment" lists. Discussing a few elements of a copyrighted list as part of a larger article on the subject of the list itself should also be comfortably within non-free content allowances, as currently
373:
The compilation author typically chooses which facts to include, in what order to place them, and how to arrange the collected data so that they may be used effectively by readers. These choices as to selection and arrangement, so long as they are made independently by the compiler and entail a
403:
clarified in § 13 of its decision of the case that "Selection implies the exercise of judgment in choosing which facts from a given body of data to include in a compilation." Selection criteria don't have to be obvious to involve human judgment. A "select bibliography" may very well use
230:
Sometimes this will be obvious ("best love songs"; "U.S. Presidents, chronologically by term"), and sometimes it will require evaluating the criteria used by the original creator. One might think that a list of the market value of used cars would be objective. But in
338:
use of the material, rather than simply competing. As with other copyrighted content, more extensive takings run a higher risk of infringement. There is no firm consensus whether or not articles on such lists should include brief excerpts, but current guidance at
171:, copyright laws in the United States protect original works of authorship in any medium while leaving open to the public the ideas, procedures, processes, systems, methods of operation, concepts, principles and discoveries contained in such works. (See
557:
United States law, but they do not constitute legal advice. They also may offer no guidance to editors outside the United States as to the legal situation in their jurisdiction. For example, editors who live in regions that have a different
553:
the list/survey results without permission", noting that "Absent a license agreement, you may still run afoul of state unfair competition and/or misappropriation laws if you take a substantial portion of the list or survey results."
198:
to predict what a court will say (especially because the courts vary in their opinions in different circuits on this matter) when there is a degree of creativity involved. You are really only safe if the list is purely formulaic."
488:, however, originality of arrangement was also found, as the publisher of the yellow pages included categories designed to be of specific interest to her Chinese-American audience which were not copied from earlier directories.
235:(1994), one such work was found to be copyrightable expression because it was based not on "data" but on the predictions of the authors using a "wide variety of informational sources and their professional judgment". The
630:, in which a coin collector's guide to current coin prices was found to be copyrightable because the publisher, CDN, weighted actual retail price information against a number of other factors to derive its list.
396:(1991), copyright was upheld on a business directory which eliminated from its yellow-page listings those entities which the publisher did not believe would remain in operation long enough to merit inclusion.
226:
points out, the law protects "compilations of things expressed as a value judgment". In assessing the nature of the material, we first have to determine if content is subjective ("value judgment") or not.
125:
or that is properly licensed for our use (with any necessary attribution). When we want to copy information from lists and compilations, we have to first figure out if they are protected by copyright.
343:, based on advice from associate counsel, indicates that "A complete or partial recreation of "Top 100" or similar lists where the list has been selected in a creative manner" is "unacceptable use."
239:
expounded that the values were "in the category of approximative statements of opinion". Had the book relied on historical statistics, the information in it (although perhaps not all elements; see
334:
practiced on
Knowledge (XXG). Our claim to fair use in such cases is stronger the more critical commentary on the list itself that the article includes. This helps to ensure that we are making
258:, other copyrightable factors may still hamper free use of the source list or compilation. After making sure content clears these criteria, it should be checked further against the below.)
148:. If selection and arrangement are creative, we cannot use the same selection and arrangement of our source, but might have to add or remove elements and rearrange content into a new work.
400:
236:
246:
Where criteria cannot be determined, we may not always be able to assess the inherent nature of content and comfortably determine that it is "safe" to freely reproduce.
254:
The following examples provide some guidance on the kinds of content that would typically be considered "discovery" and, hence, public domain. (Please remember, that
298:
estimates with no definition as to the source of data or how they are calculated and are either challenged or probably based on unreproducible experience, such as
222:
In considering whether a list or compilation is copyrightable, we have to look first at its nature. Are we talking about facts ("discovery") or opinion? As
161:. With lists and compilations, we sometimes face challenges in determining whether the material is eligible for copyright and, if so, how we might use it.
133:
protect opinion. If a source is based on "value judgments", it may be protected by copyright, even if it looks very similar to fact. And even if the source
129:
Copyright in a list may exist in the content of the list or in the way that the content was selected and arranged. Copyright does not protect facts, but it
676:
442:
a "select bibliography" which offers no parameters for its selection, giving us no insight into whether the selection criteria is creative or not
365:
Even when the content is public domain, a compilation of that content may not be, if it features creativity in selection or arrangement. As the
50:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more
Knowledge (XXG) contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
51:
350:
318:
If the content in the source list is a "value judgment", or if there is plausible reason to believe it may be, we cannot treat it like
653:
366:
165:
186:
doctrine, the amount of labor that goes into producing lists and compilations is not our concern. Instead, we consider two factors:
374:
minimal degree of creativity, are sufficiently original that
Congress may protect such compilations through the copyright laws.
681:
430:
a list of notable residents of a town; that the individuals are residents is fact, but the selection criteria "notable" is not
107:
creative in selection or presentation, information is usable but only if presentation and selection are significantly altered.
322:
material. Rather, we must limit our reproduction of the material just as we do reproduction of other copyrighted content.
671:
642:
319:
122:
144:
When a source is listing value judgments or opinions, we will likely have to limit our use of it to comply with
558:
448:
a "complete bibliography" which lists every work an author produced (or every work in, say, a given country)
330:
118:
114:
172:
392:(1991), the courts determined that a comprehensive phone directory listing was not copyrightable. But in
55:
459:
65:
17:
586:
335:
484:
was found uncreative, so was the arrangement: an alphabetical listing of every telephone holder. In
158:
565:", should take that into account before importing content from any compilation to Knowledge (XXG).
325:
There should be no issue with including a cited reference in an article about a subject mentioned
43:
514:
a table of 2011 Toyota vehicles including model and base manufacturer's recommended retail price
627:
562:
283:
183:
121:
information directly from other sources except in limited cases. We can copy content that is
582:
223:
340:
215:
193:
The copyrightability of the selection and arrangement of the content being listed/compiled.
145:
388:
270:
665:
274:
58:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
476:
Whether or not the content is copyrightable, the method of presentation may be. In
526:
a table of racecar drivers clustered by average protein consumption before a race
168:
308:
calculations which are themselves based upon numbers created by value judgements
292:
ordered rankings based on judgement, such as the top 50 most influential
Muslims
206:
610:
354:
540:, the facts (public domain material, in contrast to value judgments, as
214:
credit for a "value judgment" compilation, we are limited in our use by
299:
175:.) Discoveries (facts) are not copyrightable, but compilations often
386:
In one of the landmark cases of compilation copyright in the U.S.,
113:
The United States copyright law which governs
Knowledge (XXG) (see
205:
532:
What copyrighted selection/arrangement mean for
Knowledge (XXG)
269:
estimates which are based on a repeatable calculation, such as
190:
The copyrightability of the content being listed/compiled, and
92:
29:
141:
protect its selection and arrangement if these are creative.
210:
This is opinion and belongs to its creator. Even if we give
233:
CCC Information
Services v. Maclean Hunter Market Reports
467:
80:
73:
436:
a list of electrical engineering colleges in a country
378:
Our challenge is determining where creativity exists.
255:
240:
401:
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
282:
forecasts using standard repeatable methods, such as
237:
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
622:
For an even more recent case of similar nature, see
182:Since the United States law does not recognize the
314:What copyrighted content means for Knowledge (XXG)
541:
520:a non-standard thematic list of postage stamps
8:
508:a chronological list of monarchs of a nation
499:
415:
260:
117:) forbids Knowledge (XXG) contributors from
497:be checked further against the others.)
52:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines
638:
636:
574:
424:a list of medals won by an Olympic team
18:User:Moonriddengirl/Copyright in lists
492:Examples of creativity in arrangement
413:checked further against the others.)
146:non-free content policy and guideline
7:
408:Examples of creativity in selection
351:The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time
243:), would have been public domain.
677:Knowledge (XXG) essays about lists
511:
505:
445:
433:
421:
279:
266:
56:thoroughly vetted by the community
25:
361:Copyrightability of other factors
96:
33:
27:Essay on editing Knowledge (XXG)
536:Note that, in accordance with
1:
628:197 F.3d 1256 (9th Cir. 1999)
523:
517:
439:
427:
305:
295:
289:
654:945 F.2d 509 (2nd cir, 1991)
329:the list. For instance, the
611:44 F.3rd 61 (2nd Cir. 1994)
202:Copyrightability of content
698:
587:"The Fact/Value Dichotomy"
457:
115:Knowledge (XXG):Copyrights
63:
682:Knowledge (XXG) copyright
561:, including recognizing "
591:The Patry Copyright Blog
559:threshold of originality
104:This page in a nutshell:
331:Penny Arcade (webcomic)
157:works released under a
672:Knowledge (XXG) essays
376:
219:
173:Idea-expression divide
501:Can we safely use it?
417:Can we safely use it?
371:
262:Can we safely use it?
209:
159:suitable free license
54:, as it has not been
548:Other considerations
137:fact, copyright may
643:499 U.S. 340 (1991)
585:(27 October 2005).
220:
624:CDN INC. v. Kapes
583:Patry, William F.
563:sweat of the brow
284:net present value
184:sweat of the brow
111:
110:
91:
90:
16:(Redirected from
689:
656:
651:
645:
640:
631:
620:
614:
608:
602:
601:
599:
597:
579:
525:
519:
513:
507:
478:Key v. Chinatown
470:
447:
441:
435:
429:
423:
394:Key v. Chinatown
341:non-free content
307:
297:
291:
281:
268:
224:William F. Patry
100:
99:
93:
83:
76:
37:
36:
30:
21:
697:
696:
692:
691:
690:
688:
687:
686:
662:
661:
660:
659:
652:
648:
641:
634:
621:
617:
609:
605:
595:
593:
581:
580:
576:
571:
550:
534:
529:
502:
494:
474:
473:
466:
462:
456:
451:
418:
410:
384:
369:wrote in 1991:
363:
316:
311:
263:
252:
204:
154:
97:
87:
86:
79:
72:
68:
60:
59:
34:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
695:
693:
685:
684:
679:
674:
664:
663:
658:
657:
646:
632:
615:
603:
573:
572:
570:
567:
549:
546:
533:
530:
528:
527:
521:
515:
509:
500:
493:
490:
472:
471:
463:
458:
455:
452:
450:
449:
443:
437:
431:
425:
416:
409:
406:
389:Feist v. Rural
383:
380:
362:
359:
358:
357:
353:
348:
336:transformative
315:
312:
310:
309:
303:
293:
287:
277:
271:trend analysis
261:
251:
248:
203:
200:
195:
194:
191:
164:As set out in
153:
150:
109:
108:
101:
89:
88:
85:
84:
77:
69:
64:
61:
49:
48:
40:
38:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
694:
683:
680:
678:
675:
673:
670:
669:
667:
655:
650:
647:
644:
639:
637:
633:
629:
625:
619:
616:
612:
607:
604:
592:
588:
584:
578:
575:
568:
566:
564:
560:
554:
547:
545:
543:
539:
531:
522:
516:
510:
504:
503:
498:
491:
489:
487:
483:
479:
469:
465:
464:
461:
453:
444:
438:
432:
426:
420:
419:
414:
407:
405:
402:
397:
395:
391:
390:
381:
379:
375:
370:
368:
367:Supreme Court
360:
356:
352:
349:
346:
345:
344:
342:
337:
332:
328:
323:
321:
320:public domain
313:
304:
301:
294:
288:
285:
278:
276:
275:interpolation
272:
265:
264:
259:
257:
249:
247:
244:
242:
238:
234:
228:
225:
217:
213:
208:
201:
199:
192:
189:
188:
187:
185:
180:
178:
174:
170:
167:
162:
160:
151:
149:
147:
142:
140:
136:
132:
127:
124:
123:public domain
120:
116:
105:
102:
95:
94:
82:
78:
75:
71:
70:
67:
62:
57:
53:
47:
45:
39:
32:
31:
19:
649:
623:
618:
606:
594:. Retrieved
590:
577:
555:
551:
537:
535:
495:
485:
481:
477:
475:
411:
398:
393:
387:
385:
377:
372:
364:
326:
324:
317:
286:calculations
253:
245:
232:
229:
221:
211:
196:
181:
176:
163:
155:
143:
138:
134:
130:
128:
112:
103:
41:
596:15 February
454:Arrangement
42:This is an
666:Categories
152:Background
382:Selection
256:per below
166:17 U.S.C.
66:Shortcuts
460:Shortcut
355:Time 100
347:Examples
250:Examples
81:WP:CLIST
468:WP:CILA
119:copying
300:bookie
216:WP:NFC
212:proper
74:WP:CIL
569:Notes
542:above
538:Feist
482:Feist
241:below
169:§ 102
139:still
44:essay
598:2011
399:The
302:odds
131:does
486:Key
273:or
177:are
668::
635:^
626:,
589:.
327:in
135:is
613:.
600:.
524:✗
518:✗
512:✓
506:✓
446:✓
440:✗
434:✓
428:✗
422:✓
306:✗
296:✗
290:✗
280:✓
267:✓
218:.
46:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
