[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CSRG archives

From: Hyman Rosen
Subject: Re: CSRG archives
Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 16:10:38 -0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0

On 3/23/2010 4:56 PM, RJack wrote:
Why not read Feist (supra).

Sure. <>:
    To qualify for copyright protection, a work must be original
    to the author. See: Harper & Row, supra, at 547-549, 105 S.Ct.,
    at 2223-2224. Original, as the term is used in copyright, means
    only that the work was independently created by the author (as
    opposed to copied from other works), and that it possesses at
    least some minimal degree of creativity. 1 M. Nimmer & D. Nimmer,
    Copyright ss 2.01[A], [B] (1990) (hereinafter Nimmer). To be sure,
    the requisite level of creativity is extremely low; even a slight
    amount will suffice. The vast majority of works make the grade
    quite easily, as they possess some creative spark, "no matter
    how crude, humble or obvious" it might be. Id., s 1.08[C] [1].
    Originality does not signify novelty; a work may be original
    even though it closely resembles other works so long as the
    similarity is fortuitous, not the result of copying.

More than stupid. Willfully, obtusely stupid.
Don't you get tired of it?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]