[B5JMS] attn. JMS: A TV writing question...

[b5jms at cs.columbia.edu]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Jeff Vavasour <jeffv at physics.ubc.ca>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 06:29:06 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 33

"Jms at B5" <jmsatb5 at aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030630041031.17992.00001386 at mb-m12.aol.com...
> >Why shouldn't I receive royalties when an appellate brief which I've
> >drafted is cited in case law or in pleadings?
>
> There's a flaw in your logic.  Are you making a point-for-point comparison
to
> your brief and, say, Godel-Escher-Bach?  Or The World According to Garp?
>
> There is, and should be, a special category for works of art, and for
artists.

This is an over-narrow view of what defines a creative work.  I wouldn't call
a textbook "art", per se, but it's no less worthy of copyright.  The author
puts effort into condensing material and spends time working on the clarity of
the presentation.  That makes it unique and creative, and thus intellectual
property worthy of protection, but it may be a stretch to call it art.

(Incidentally, if we mold and tweak the definition for "art" so that it
encompasses such works, then the above statement would become circular:  art
is worthy of protection; that which is worthy of protection is called art.)

> (And there's a difference between a brief being *cited* and a work being
> completely reproduced.  Any good lawyer, or paralegal, would know that.)

I'd think this is the more relevant distinction.  Citing is akin to excerpts
of a fictional work quoted for the purpose of review.  Though, citing can be
even less infringing, being nothing more than a reference to a publication
without any quotes whatsoever.

- Jeff



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 07:17:02 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 19

>This is an over-narrow view of what defines a creative work.  I wouldn't call
>a textbook "art", per se, but it's no less worthy of copyright.  The author
>puts effort into condensing material and spends time working on the clarity
>of
>the presentation.  

And textbooks are indeed protected by copyright.


 jms

(jmsatb5 at aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd., 
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine 
and don't send me story ideas)