Re: Copyright URLs not compilations
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Copyright Forum ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by M. Arthur Auslander on April 06, 2001 at 05:49:27:
In Reply to: Copyright URLs not compilations posted by Christina on April 05, 2001 at 18:00:47:
: Here is a question:
: I have a niche publication (serial) that has come out monthly since 4/98. I list and review select sites in a niche market. Since 1998 I have registered the serials at the Copyright Office as not only the serial, but the compilation of sites.
: I've settled a matter favorably in the past, but it helped that the company copied my "typos" and erros as well--plus they admitted it.
: Now I have a matter, where the woman (a former customer) said she could "also do it better and cheaper" in regards to my book so she has published one that is 98% identical. She has laid it out a bit differently though. She does not really review each site, just gives a blurb.
: She claims my book was not a derivative or anything like that. Do I have a case? Mine has been on the market since 4/98. Hers came out in 01/01.
If complex problems like yours could be solved in paragraphs there would be no need for lawyers. The case law, as I recollect is not entirely clear.
The 98% is not clear how it was derived.
We always try to look ahead and would have strongly emphasized our trademark or service mark as a reliable source.
M. Arthur Auslander
The Intellectual Property Law Server
Old Copyright Forum