tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post8392789820386867267..comments2024-03-21T19:08:05.737-07:00Comments on Genealogy's Star: Ownership and Genealogy -- What is and What is not OwnedJames Tannerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-89788919389194459562014-10-14T18:17:17.896-07:002014-10-14T18:17:17.896-07:00Unfortunately, you did not include the definition ...Unfortunately, you did not include the definition of a "database." Thanks for the heads up about the Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997 (the "Regulations"), which implemented into UK law the provisions of the 1996 EC Council Directive on the legal protection of databases and came into force on 1 January 1998, by way of a "database right". My response will have to be made in blog post rather than a long Reply. Thanks again for the comment. James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-25527431197052289942014-10-14T09:46:26.782-07:002014-10-14T09:46:26.782-07:00I keep hearing the expression "facts cannot b...I keep hearing the expression "facts cannot be copyrighted" which I admit is true in the USA but not true in Europe or other more enlightened communities.<br />Over here in Europe facts are copyrightable and courts have upheld this right.<br /><br />It comes under the database right section of copyright law which protects not only "facts" but "sweat of the brow".<br /><br />The 1997 legislation on Database Right states-<br />http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/3032/contents/made<br />“Acts infringing database right<br />16. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Part, a person infringes database right in a database if, without the consent of the owner of the right, he extracts or re-utilises all or a substantial part of the contents of the database.<br />(2) For the purposes of this Part, the repeated and systematic extraction or re-utilisation of insubstantial parts of the contents of a database may amount to the extraction or re-utilisation of a substantial part of those contents.”<br />As you can see from the above even repeated use of insubstantial parts of a database could constitute breach of database right which is a form of breach of copyright.<br /><br />Eventually as with common copyright the USA will be dragged screaming into line with the more advanced societies, until that time I am afraid will continue to put up with erroneous claims that "facts cannot be copyrighted".<br />Cheers<br />GuyGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14661609230878792638noreply@blogger.com