27:
216:(1916), the question arose as to whether certain mathematics exam papers, consisting of conventional problems presented in a conventional manner, were original literary works in which copyright would subsist. The court held that originality did not mean that the work must be an expression of individual thought, and the fact that the authors drew on a body of knowledge common to mathematicians did not compromise originality. The requirement of originality, it was held, did not require that expression be in an original or novel form. It did, however, require that the work not be copied from another work. It must originate from the author. Consequently, even though there was no creative input, the skill, labour, and judgement of the authors was sufficient to make the papers original literary works.
865:
554:米国著作権法における創作性の概念は、その後下級裁判所の採用した額の汗 (sweat of the brow) の理論によって一時混乱した。しかし、約90年ぶりに連邦最高裁が創作性の概念を論じた1991年のファイスト判決は、次のように述べて、上記の伝統的理解を確認した。(translation: The definition of Originality had been disturbed by the sweat of the brow doctrine adopted by lower courts. After almost 90 years from the 1903 Bleistein case, however, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the traditional understanding of the Originality at the Feist case in 1991.)
254:
labour was enough to grant protection to a work, since "unless the procedures for creating the lists concerned as described by the national court are supplemented by elements reflecting originality in the selection or arrangement of the data contained in those lists, they do not suffice for those lists to be protected by the copyright laid down in the directive".
206:
added for the first time a specific statutory requirement that, for copyright to subsist in a work, that work must be "original". However, for well over a hundred years UK courts did not adopt a literal reading of that requirement, instead holding that a significant expenditure of skill and labour in
253:
leagues. Football DataCo asserted that these schedules were copyrighted works due to the skill and labour involved in their preparation, and that the company was given exclusive rights to license their reproduction. Based on its interpretation of UK law, the court rejected the notion that skill and
59:
Under a "sweat of the brow" doctrine, the creator of a work, even if it is completely unoriginal, is entitled to have that effort and expense protected; no one else may use such a work without permission, but must instead recreate the work by independent research or effort. The classic example is a
294:
ruled that digitized versions of public domain paintings were entitled to new copyrights due to the effort and expertise necessary to create the reproductions. The case was appealed. In 2018 a court upheld the decision that the digitized public domain paintings were entitled to new copyrights. In
265:
images are not protected by copyright, arguing that "according to the Court of
Justice of the European Union which has effect in UK law, copyright can only subsist in subject matter that is original in the sense that it is the author's own 'intellectual creation'. Given this criterion, it seems
229:. In court, she accepted that she was not the creative author of the writing. Nonetheless, the court held that she had exercised sufficient labour and skill in translating and transcribing what the spirits told her, so she had a copyright in the resulting literary work.
331:
in order to be copyrightable. In other words, Israeli law does not subscribe to the "sweat of the brow" doctrine. However, the amount of originality required is minimal, and the transliteration or interpretation of an artifact is covered by copyright.
64:. In a "sweat of the brow" jurisdiction, such a directory may not be copied, but instead a competitor must independently collect the information to issue a competing directory. The same rule generally applies to databases and lists of facts.
26:
845:
319:. Article 14 of the directive states that reproductions of works of visual art that are in the public domain cannot be subject to copyright or related rights, unless the reproduction is an original creative work.
38:
throughout the world. However, under the "sweat of the brow" doctrine, new copyright claims could be made over mechanical reproductions of the etching, due to the skill and labour involved in the reproduction.
664:
193:. The House of Lords held that the reporters were indeed "authors", and hence entitled to copyright, on the basis of the skill, effort and time involved in preparing the text for publication.
841:
257:
This
European approach has prevailed over the old 'skill and labour' test. In a copyright notice on "digital images, photographs and the internet" last updated in November 2015, the UK
467:
316:
296:
828:
440:
734:
56:
gains rights through simple diligence during the creation of a work, such as a database, or a directory. Substantial creativity or "originality" is not required.
258:
127:
770:
Nolte, Georg (1 July 2010). "Zur
Forderung der Presseverleger nach Einführung eines speziellen Leistungsschutzrechts: Eine kritische Auseinandersetzung".
924:
212:
170:
187:
publications. The question for the court was whether the reporters could be considered "authors" of the published versions under the terms of the
75:
on non-original databases, that is on those that embody no creativity, but are a consequence of substantial investment (financial, labour etc.).
798:
547:
504:
138:
ruling in the US, mere collections of facts are considered unoriginal and thus not protected by copyright, no matter how much work went into
412:
393:
278:
clarified that, in the UK, no new copyright is created in making a photographic reproduction of a two-dimensional public domain artwork.
709:
267:
173:, and transcribed them, adding punctuation, corrections and revisions. These were then published as verbatim reports of the speeches in
671:
953:
112:
68:
299:. Germany's implementation law specified that reproductions of visual works in the public domain are not protected by copyright or
142:
them. The arrangement and presentation of a collection may be original, but not if it is "simple and obvious" such as a list in
660:
444:
94:
refers to the effort expended in labour, and the value created thereby. The phrase is famously used in
English translations of
587:
520:
266:
unlikely that what is merely a retouched, digitised image of an older work can be considered as 'original'." A November 2023
700:
901:
122:
95:
238:
877:
372:
328:
575:
921:
958:
696:
357:
275:
246:
471:
180:
613:
225:(1927), a psychic in a trance claimed to have written down what spirits told her, through a process of
250:
902:"'Originality' After the Dead Sea Scrolls Decision: Implications for the American Law of Copyright"
61:
514:
291:
189:
20:
419:
799:"Digitising public domain images creates a new copyright, rules German court [Updated]"
579:
390:
744:
739:
583:
543:
500:
226:
290:) due to the effort involved in the production or exploitation of creative works. In 2016, a
779:
752:
730:
713:
567:
202:
was decided, UK copyright law contained no explicit notion of "originality". The subsequent
84:
928:
397:
242:
169:(1900) in which reporters took down shorthand notes of a series of speeches given by the
735:"Court of Appeal ruling will prevent UK museums from charging reproduction fees—at last"
474:
362:
312:
300:
221:
163:
An early example of the "sweat of the brow" doctrine in UK law was the leading case of
72:
49:
947:
568:
262:
198:
165:
147:
118:
35:
31:
542:]. ユニ知的所有権ブックス9 (UNI IP Books 9) (in Japanese) (2 ed.). 太田出版 (Ohta Books).
237:
The 'skill and labour' approach was challenged in 2012 when a case was taken to the
367:
143:
922:"Of Scientific Claims and Proprietary Rights: Lessons from the Dead Sea Scrolls"
842:"Bundesgerichtshof zur Veröffentlichung von Fotografien gemeinfreier Kunstwerke"
844:(Press release) (in German). Karlsruhe Germany: Bundesgerichtshof. 2018-12-20.
783:
635:
496:
352:
878:"Final text of the Directive as submitted to the Parliament on 26 March 2019"
748:
824:
Reiss-Engelhorn Museum (REM) of the City of
Mannheim v. Wikimedia Foundation
756:
717:
341:
175:
139:
46:
183:, reproduced the speeches in a book, relying heavily without permission on
346:
249:
over web sites which were reproducing match schedules from several major
34:, the artist of this 1797 etching, died in 1815, his works are in the
53:
570:
An
Emerging Intellectual Property Paradigm: Perspectives from Canada
131:; until then it had been upheld in a number of US copyright cases.
87:
25:
665:"Copyright Notice: digital images, photographs and the internet"
213:
University of London Press Ltd v
University Tutorial Press Ltd
495:] (in Japanese). Translated by 牧野 (Makino), 和夫 (Kazuo).
602:
University of London Press v
University Tutorial 2 Ch 601
286:
Prior to 2021, German law granted ancillary copyrights (
636:"Football match fixture list copyright claim rejected"
614:"The Patry Copyright Blog: Authorship and Religion"
456:
By the sweat of your brow will you have food to eat
317:
Directive on
Copyright in the Digital Single Market
297:
Directive on
Copyright in the Digital Single Market
98:. The law doctrine takes its name from this idiom.
416:Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913 ed)
866:Germany's Directive 2019/790 Implementation Law
443:. Tyndale House Publishers, inc. Archived from
327:Israeli law requires that a work exhibit some
71:are obliged to confer protection known as the
67:According to the Databases Directive 96/9/EC,
418:. ARTFL Project. p. 1457. Archived from
128:Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service
8:
295:2021, Germany implemented Article 14 of the
207:the creation of a new work was sufficient.
906:Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review
540:The Fundamentals of American Copyright Law
493:Understanding Copyright Law (4th edition)
827: (Landgericht Berlin 2016),
534:山本 (Yamamoto), 隆司 (Takashi B.) (2008).
383:
512:
261:stated that digital reproductions of
7:
121:rejected this doctrine in the 1991
772:Zeitschrift für Geistiges Eigentum
113:Copyright law in the United States
14:
52:. According to this doctrine, an
848:from the original on 2019-06-21
661:UK Intellectual Property Office
487:Leaffer, Marshall A. (2008) .
19:For the Jully Black song, see
1:
634:Wilson, Bill (1 March 2012).
797:Moody, Glyn (23 June 2016).
612:William Patry (2005-08-10).
353:Lockean Classical liberalism
349:(complement to avoid abuses)
259:Intellectual Property Office
123:United States Supreme Court
975:
920:Elkin-Koren, Niva (2001).
784:10.1628/186723710792175149
616:. Williampatry.blogspot.gr
519:: CS1 maint: postscript (
179:newspaper. The defendant,
110:
18:
954:Intellectual property law
566:Gendreau, Ysolde (2009).
239:European Court of Justice
900:Tempska, Urzula (2002).
642:. London, United Kingdom
509:--Chapter 2 Article 12-B
441:"New Living Translation"
373:Threshold of originality
292:regional court in Berlin
576:Edward Elgar Publishing
233:New (European) approach
69:member states of the EU
358:Labour theory of value
247:copyright infringement
39:
16:Copyright law doctrine
391:EU Richtlinie 96/9/EG
329:degree of originality
29:
733:(29 December 2023).
699:(20 November 2023),
288:Leistungsschutzrecht
96:Genesis 3:19
697:Lord Justice Arnold
499:Japan. p. 94.
276:Lord Justice Arnold
92:sweat of one's brow
62:telephone directory
933:Houston Law Review
927:2015-09-24 at the
396:2007-06-21 at the
204:Copyright Act 1911
190:Copyright Act 1842
40:
21:Sweat of Your Brow
740:The Art Newspaper
663:(November 2015).
549:978-4-7783-1112-4
506:978-4-8419-0509-0
227:automatic writing
83:In a traditional
43:Sweat of the brow
966:
939:
918:
912:
898:
892:
891:
889:
887:
882:
874:
868:
863:
857:
856:
854:
853:
838:
832:
826:
820:
814:
813:
811:
809:
794:
788:
787:
767:
761:
760:
731:Bendor Grosvenor
727:
721:
720:
707:
693:
687:
686:
684:
682:
676:
670:. Archived from
669:
657:
651:
650:
648:
647:
631:
625:
624:
622:
621:
609:
603:
600:
594:
593:
573:
563:
557:
556:
531:
525:
524:
518:
510:
484:
478:
465:
459:
458:
453:
452:
437:
431:
430:
428:
427:
409:
403:
402:
388:
171:Earl of Rosebery
974:
973:
969:
968:
967:
965:
964:
963:
944:
943:
942:
929:Wayback Machine
919:
915:
899:
895:
885:
883:
880:
876:
875:
871:
864:
860:
851:
849:
840:
839:
835:
822:
821:
817:
807:
805:
803:Ars Technica UK
796:
795:
791:
769:
768:
764:
729:
728:
724:
710:Court of Appeal
705:
695:
694:
690:
680:
678:
674:
667:
659:
658:
654:
645:
643:
633:
632:
628:
619:
617:
611:
610:
606:
601:
597:
590:
565:
564:
560:
550:
533:
532:
528:
511:
507:
486:
485:
481:
466:
462:
450:
448:
439:
438:
434:
425:
423:
411:
410:
406:
400:
398:Wayback Machine
389:
385:
381:
338:
325:
309:
284:
272:THJ v. Sheridan
243:Football DataCo
235:
161:
156:
115:
109:
104:
81:
24:
17:
12:
11:
5:
972:
970:
962:
961:
956:
946:
945:
941:
940:
938:(2): 458, 460.
913:
893:
869:
858:
833:
815:
789:
778:(2): 165–195.
762:
722:
702:THJ v Sheridan
688:
677:on 1 June 2020
652:
626:
604:
595:
588:
558:
548:
526:
505:
479:
460:
432:
413:"Sweat, v. t."
404:
382:
380:
377:
376:
375:
370:
365:
363:Database right
360:
355:
350:
344:
337:
334:
324:
321:
313:European Union
308:
307:European Union
305:
301:related rights
283:
280:
234:
231:
222:Cummins v Bond
160:
157:
155:
154:United Kingdom
152:
108:
105:
103:
100:
80:
77:
73:database right
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
971:
960:
959:Copyright law
957:
955:
952:
951:
949:
937:
934:
930:
926:
923:
917:
914:
910:
907:
903:
897:
894:
879:
873:
870:
867:
862:
859:
847:
843:
837:
834:
830:
825:
819:
816:
804:
800:
793:
790:
785:
781:
777:
774:(in German).
773:
766:
763:
758:
754:
750:
746:
742:
741:
736:
732:
726:
723:
719:
715:
711:
704:
703:
698:
692:
689:
673:
666:
662:
656:
653:
641:
637:
630:
627:
615:
608:
605:
599:
596:
591:
585:
581:
577:
572:
571:
562:
559:
555:
551:
545:
541:
537:
536:アメリカ著作権法の基礎知識
530:
527:
522:
516:
508:
502:
498:
494:
490:
483:
480:
476:
473:
469:
464:
461:
457:
447:on 2016-04-24
446:
442:
436:
433:
422:on 2006-03-03
421:
417:
414:
408:
405:
399:
395:
392:
387:
384:
378:
374:
371:
369:
366:
364:
361:
359:
356:
354:
351:
348:
345:
343:
340:
339:
335:
333:
330:
322:
320:
318:
314:
311:In 2019, the
306:
304:
302:
298:
293:
289:
281:
279:
277:
273:
269:
264:
263:public domain
260:
255:
252:
248:
244:
240:
232:
230:
228:
224:
223:
217:
215:
214:
208:
205:
201:
200:
199:Walter v Lane
194:
192:
191:
186:
182:
178:
177:
172:
168:
167:
166:Walter v Lane
158:
153:
151:
149:
148:chronological
145:
141:
137:
132:
130:
129:
124:
120:
119:United States
114:
107:United States
106:
101:
99:
97:
93:
89:
86:
78:
76:
74:
70:
65:
63:
57:
55:
51:
48:
44:
37:
36:public domain
33:
32:James Gillray
28:
22:
935:
932:
916:
908:
905:
896:
884:. Retrieved
872:
861:
850:. Retrieved
836:
823:
818:
806:. Retrieved
802:
792:
775:
771:
765:
738:
725:
701:
691:
679:. Retrieved
672:the original
655:
644:. Retrieved
639:
629:
618:. Retrieved
607:
598:
569:
561:
553:
539:
535:
529:
492:
488:
482:
463:
455:
449:. Retrieved
445:the original
435:
424:. Retrieved
420:the original
415:
407:
386:
368:Sweat equity
326:
315:adopted the
310:
287:
285:
271:
268:Appeal Court
256:
236:
220:
218:
211:
209:
203:
197:
196:At the time
195:
188:
184:
174:
164:
162:
159:Old approach
144:alphabetical
135:
133:
126:
116:
102:By territory
91:
82:
66:
58:
50:law doctrine
42:
41:
578:. pp.
477: (1991)
401:(in German)
274:, 2023) by
270:judgement (
948:Categories
852:2020-01-26
757:Q124044230
718:Q124044396
681:3 December
646:2022-01-23
620:2013-10-02
589:1847205976
497:LexisNexis
451:2007-05-30
426:2007-05-30
379:References
134:Under the
111:See also:
911:(1): 132.
749:0960-6556
515:cite book
342:Copyfraud
241:in which
185:The Times
181:John Lane
176:The Times
140:collating
79:Etymology
47:copyright
925:Archived
886:26 March
846:Archived
753:Wikidata
714:Wikidata
640:BBC News
489:アメリカ著作権法
394:Archived
347:Fair use
336:See also
251:football
245:claimed
282:Germany
150:order.
85:English
808:5 July
755:
747:
716:
586:
582:–152.
546:
503:
323:Israel
90:, the
54:author
881:(PDF)
706:(PDF)
675:(PDF)
668:(PDF)
538:[
491:[
470:
136:Feist
125:case
88:idiom
45:is a
888:2019
829:Text
810:2016
745:ISSN
683:2015
584:ISBN
544:ISBN
521:link
501:ISBN
472:U.S.
117:The
780:doi
580:151
475:340
468:499
219:In
210:In
146:or
30:As
950::
936:38
931:,
904:.
801:.
751:.
743:.
737:.
712:,
708:,
638:.
574:.
552:.
517:}}
513:{{
454:.
303:.
909:6
890:.
855:.
831:.
812:.
786:.
782::
776:2
759:.
685:.
649:.
623:.
592:.
523:)
429:.
23:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
