Copyright question if there's a lawyer around... - GoFuckYourself.com

disregard · 06-29-2006, 11:53 PM

Out of semi-idle curiosity, does anyone know if it is illegal to republish factual information in your own words? Is it copyright infringement if you learn material purported to be factual, and then republish that information in your own words for the purpose of making a profit?

For example, if I read a book on google optimization, and then decide to write one which contains predominantly the same information, who would win in court if I were sued? What law might I be breaking (copyright, or something else?), and if it is not copyright infringement, is there a way to protect a work a write from being taken in this way if the information is non-fiction, and factual?

What if my facts are "new information" that has never been published before?

What if I publish a directory?

$5 submissions · 06-30-2006, 12:16 AM

Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

disregard · 06-30-2006, 12:18 AM

Good call, thanks! I love that site. Still, I'm curious if anyone has actual experience with this.

disregard · 06-30-2006, 12:23 AM

I'm also curious about this:

"Compilations of facts or data may also be copyrighted, but such a copyright is thin; it only applies to the particular selection and arrangement of the included items, not to the particular items themselves. In some jurisdictions the contents of databases are expressly covered by statute."

Does this suggest that, for example, thehun.com only has a legal right to prevent people from publishing links from his page is they are arranged in a similar mannar to the original "publication"?

Certainly, I believe that morally, the hun has a right to protect his data, and he probably has financial means to make it difficult to rip off profitably (even if he wouldn't win the case). Does the law (in general) agree with me?

dissipate · 06-30-2006, 12:29 AM

This is a bit of a dumbed down version of the answer you're looking for: You should give reference to it as a source of research in the book. As long as you're not mirroring the structure of the source, you're fine. Obviously you shouldn't be plagarising anything from the source, or even strongly paraphrasing for that matter.

Do I need to charge you for that? Gotta pay off these law school loans somehow.

06-29-2006, 11:53 PM	#1
disregard Confirmed User Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 118	Copyright question if there's a lawyer around... Out of semi-idle curiosity, does anyone know if it is illegal to republish factual information in your own words? Is it copyright infringement if you learn material purported to be factual, and then republish that information in your own words for the purpose of making a profit? For example, if I read a book on google optimization, and then decide to write one which contains predominantly the same information, who would win in court if I were sued? What law might I be breaking (copyright, or something else?), and if it is not copyright infringement, is there a way to protect a work a write from being taken in this way if the information is non-fiction, and factual? What if my facts are "new information" that has never been published before? What if I publish a directory? __________________ house o' fart

06-30-2006, 12:16 AM	#2
$5 submissions I help you SUCCEED Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Pearl of the Orient Seas Posts: 32,195	Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright __________________ Need a NON-ADULT income stream? We build your YOUTUBE CHANNEL for only $20 per video! For Hire: $3/hour or $400 per month Marketing Specialist Virtual Assistants

06-30-2006, 12:18 AM	#3
disregard Confirmed User Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 118	Good call, thanks! I love that site. Still, I'm curious if anyone has actual experience with this. __________________ house o' fart

06-30-2006, 12:23 AM	#4
disregard Confirmed User Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 118	I'm also curious about this: "Compilations of facts or data may also be copyrighted, but such a copyright is thin; it only applies to the particular selection and arrangement of the included items, not to the particular items themselves. In some jurisdictions the contents of databases are expressly covered by statute." Does this suggest that, for example, thehun.com only has a legal right to prevent people from publishing links from his page is they are arranged in a similar mannar to the original "publication"? Certainly, I believe that morally, the hun has a right to protect his data, and he probably has financial means to make it difficult to rip off profitably (even if he wouldn't win the case). Does the law (in general) agree with me? __________________ house o' fart

06-30-2006, 12:29 AM	#5
dissipate The Dirty Frenchman Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lost Angeles Posts: 8,904	This is a bit of a dumbed down version of the answer you're looking for: You should give reference to it as a source of research in the book. As long as you're not mirroring the structure of the source, you're fine. Obviously you shouldn't be plagarising anything from the source, or even strongly paraphrasing for that matter. Do I need to charge you for that? Gotta pay off these law school loans somehow. Last edited by dissipate; 06-30-2006 at 12:32 AM..