Australian phone book content not protected by copyright [telecom]

I recall a similar court ruling here in the USA from a couple of decades ago that cited the reason "lacks requisite originality" in denying a phone book copyright protection appeal.

Although I am not a lawyer, I believe that the general theory in the USA is that the facts in a database cannot by copyright protected, only the manner and format of their presentation can be. For example, the layout of the streets and highways in your area is not copyright protectable, but a map that you draw to describe them is. Same thing with the listings in a phone book.

Consistent with MGK's remarks above, the Copyright Office insisted, in conjunction with our last two copyright applications, that the Index portion of our books were simply not copyright-able, being not original text but mere alphabetized data.

Cheers, -- tlvp

-- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP

This court decision is unlike the US decision. I've never heard of a court ruling that classification of listings as in yellow pages isn't a copyrightable activity.

I've used plenty of services that use automated classification assignments on line. Even if they are copyrightable as compilations (as no court has yet said that they aren't), that copyright is utterly worthless given the typically bizarre results one gets. There is a real value to the user with classifications performed by humans editing the database.

[[.. sneck ..]]

The U.S. case is "Feist v. Rural Tel." 499 US 340. It applied to the content of white-pages directory listings.

Sup. Ct. heard it in 1991, the case had been in the courts for years before that.

Under U.S. copyright law, 'facts of nature' are not copyrightable. For a thing to be copyrightable, it must embody a degree of 'creative effort'. That 'creativity' is what is protected.

Since 'facts' are -not- created, they fail the creativity requirement.

Thus, "facts" are not copyrightable.

*mechanical* orderings -- e.g. 'alphabetical', do not involve creative effort, and are, thus, not copyrightable.

A "selective' compilation of facts, may qualify for a compilation copyright, where the necessary 'creativity' is in the selection of which facts to include, and which to exclude.

The _layout_ of individual "yellow pages" display ads is clearly copyrightable content. Ditto for the overall layout of the display ads on the pages. (this being the arrangement of the 'blocks' of various shapes/sizes, w/o regard to the content thereof.) the individual, minimal, "line-item listings", are "iffy" at best. The set of categories uses, although -not- individual category names, _would_ show the requisite 'creativity' for copyright protection.

"Who is listed in what category" probably also fails the 'creativity' test, the producer of the book is not 'selecting' who is included. Anyone/everyone who pays the requisite fee is 'automatically' included. And the advertiser, _not_ the publisher, is the party who 'selects' which category/categories they wish to be included in. Hence the publisher is not exercising any protectable creativity in that regard.

That is *very* arguable. There is significant 'creative effort' -- the 'protectable' quality -- in the selection of _what_ to index and what not to.

There is a US Supereme Court case known as Feist which specifically said that the facts in a white pages directory are not eligible for copyright.

R's, John

The particular collection of classifications offered is a 'creative work', to which copyright would apply.

The telco cannot claim copyright on "which classification(s)" a given listing appears in, because it is not _their_ 'creative effort' that is involved. The category (or categories, if the customer wants to pay extra for the additional listings) is chosen by the customer, not the telco. An ad sales rep may make suggestions, but the final determination is made by the customer.

At most, telco can --arguably-- claim a 'compilation copyright' on the yellow pages, as a whole. For display ads, copyright on the ad content belongs to the telco customer. the minimal 'line item listings' are not copyrightable in and of themselves, they are mere 'facts', without the required 'creative effort'.

One cannot argue that the telco exercises 'creative effort' in selecting who is listed in the yellow pages -- anybody who pays for a listing _is_ listed. That's mechanical, not creative.

***** Moderator's Note *****

So, if the customer chooses the category, how did a Funeral Director wind up listed under "Frozen Meat"? Or, was that an urban legend?

Bill Horne Moderator

I think I told this tale once before to this group, but ...

Back years ago, decades ago, actually, my dad was one of the principals of a small publishing company which, among other things, produced 'alternative' phone directories for various small communities. Think of three states which begin with 'I' and have a lot of mom-n-pop indie ILECs. ;-)

For a number of years, this was very lucrative. They undersold TPC for display ads and absolutely deluged the towns with books in the days that TPC was limiting the number of directories they distributed.

Back then the law said that TPC, at least here in the States, had a valid copyright on the Phone Book including the residential listings, and it was well known that TPC used 'ringers' or copyright traps to enforce this.

They admittedly used the official Phone Book as the source of their residential listings.

So how did they deal with the ringers ?? I'm glad you asked. ;-)

They would hire a couple of little old ladies who 'knew everyone' who could quite easily pick out the ringers. They were very prolific at identifying names that simply did not exist in the community. Instead of hunting down things such as listings at vacant lots, streets that did not exist, and residential numbers at TPC's address, they simply knew who resided in said town and which listings were fictitious.

IIRC, they were never caught by TPC for using their listing.

In once case I remember, the incumbent mom-n-pop TPC actually hired them to do their official Phone Book. This was long before the term 'outsourcing' was in vogue. ;-)

A lot of business telephone subscribers are unaware that they may request their own yellow pages classification, so classification is performed for any business telephone subscriber who doesn't request it. That sounds like copyrightable editing to me.

In any event, the advertising directory publisher has to decide what classified headings to offer. Typically the telephone subscriber who self selects would do so from appropriate headings, unless he makes a successful argument that no existing heading adequately describes his business, although in that case, one questions if any of that business's prospective customers would use the yellow pages to find him.

The simple explanation -- coding/transcription error of a -numeric- identifier.

On a related note, is the Australian postal code directory copyrighted? I've noted that the Canadian postal code directory is protected by a "crown copyright"; i.e., copyrighted by Elizabeth II herself, so I assume the Australian director is protected by a similar copyright.

I have a mental image of HRH sitting at her laptop on her Jacobean desk, corgis at her feet, busily editing postal code directories.

Neal McLain

I get a similar notice when I fire up my GPS as it contains Canadian maps. And I had a similar image of the Queen pouring over atlases or an old tan blobe and entering data into her laptop.

And not to steer completely off the deep end here. I sometimes dream of pocket watches. I'm not sure why. I recently dreamed the Queen gave me a pocket watch. I said, "Oh boy! A pocket watch! I've always wanted one." She scowled at me and said in a stern voice, "Good sir, that pocket watch is property of the Crown and shall be returned immediately upon completion of this dream." So I can't get away with ripping off the Buckingham Palace even in my dreams.

John

According to them, it seems so:

But I suspect that the same ruling that affects the telephone directories would now apply to this as there are many similarities between the two.

The ruling classes figured out many thousands of years ago to let their minions do all the dirty work in their names, and it ain't changed today.....

Perhaps sitting at the desk looking at the balance sheet and smiling?

In countries which accept the queen (or king) of England as their soverign, "the crown" in that sense means the govenrment.

Wes Leatherock snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com snipped-for-privacy@aol.com

Hehehehe

The United States Postal Service ZIP Code directory is copyrighted and competing directories are published under license. I suppose since the post office does the actual work assigning ZIP Codes that it's possible to copyright? ZIP Codes are basic information incorporated into any demographic and transporation routing database without license, so I'm not sure how it's possible to prevent someone else from publishing a ZIP Code directory.

On Tue, 21 Dec 2010 04:15:05 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" wrote in comp.dcom.telecom:

The USPS's concern is for their electronic program. They want complete accuracy if they are going to give junk mail and bills a discount. Even though the software that verifies Zip+4 or Carrier Route presort is not sold by the USPS, they want to make sure that it is accurate.

The Zip code system has been extended, first with the +4, which mainly identifies usually a block of house numbrs, or a specific post office box, with another three digits which are the last two digits of your house number, plus a check digit. This uniquely identifies any address in the United States. The discounts are offerred to any larger mailer, increasing as the number of pieces mailed at one time, not just bills and junk mail. When it comes from the post office sorting equipment to a letter carrier at your local station or branch, it is already sorted in the delivery order for that carrier's route.

Wes Leatherock snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com snipped-for-privacy@aol.com

Any publisher of directory information, attempting to enforce copyright, would argue that control of the information for the purpose of accuracy is of critical concern. No one ever argues that he wishes to fully exploit information for profit.

The 5-digit ZIP Code directory was once ubiquitous. Today, its use is inadequate to meet ZIP Code accuracy standards for any presorted mail presented to the post office that requires a 5-digit ZIP Code. For manually maintained mailing lists, mailers are still allowed to lookup ZIP Codes one at a time or obtain them from their correspondents, but if they look them up, they are required to use the post office Web site.

If 5-digit ZIP Code Directories are still licensed, what's the point?

To qualify for many automation discounts, mailers must use software certified by the post office to encode their mailing lists. Both commercial and in-house software may be certified.

White Pages may include:

1) Dialing instructions for local and toll calls; 2) Dialing instructions for special feature services (ie disable call waiting) 3) Special listing sections for government numbers, broken down by federal, state, and local, and social service help listings.

It would seem to me all of the above would meet the defintion for creative work and be copyrightable.

Also, most listings use abbreviations of the street address and town so as to squeeze all the information onto one line. Also, in recent years Bell directories saved space by printing a last name of a group of people only once, following it with only the first name, eg SMITH John ... Joseph ... Mary ...

Does the choice of how to abbreviate stuff count as creativity? Telephone directory abbreviations were often not used elsewhere. Does the innovation of listing a last name only once count as "creativity"?

Suppose a scientist discovers a new law of nature. Would it be correct to say that if he merely published the law it would not be copyrightable because it was a 'fact'; but if he wrote up his research to show how he discovered the new law that would be copyrightable since it was his 'creative effort'?