On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 01:48:19PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote: > > Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> First, since the frequency can be construed as a fact, and therefore > >> is not copyrightable work of authorship, I'm not particularly > >> concerned by this. [If there is a jurisdiction which does construe > >> mere compendiums of facts as a work of authorship, we could perhaps > >> reconsider this.] > > > > The European Union has a Database Directive which grants monopoly > > rights to the creators of databases, so the prohibition above, which > > doesn't mention copyright, could still be effective. > > Bummer. Now the EU gets stuck with allowing copyrights on the various > Genome sequences. I guess the phenomenon of governmentally sanctioned > rape of the populace is spreading. > >
I guess that is part of the reason why the EU donated huge amounts of public funding to the parts of the human genome project that insisted on the equivalent of free software licensing (with non-DFSG variations appropriate to the field). See e.g. http://www.hgsc.bcm.tmc.edu/projects/conditions_for_use.html Also note the much shorter duration of database rights (15 years for databases, life+70 years for copyright). In contrast geographical maps etc. enjoy the full copyright duration. Oh and do recall, that in European legal thinking, copyright is not a government granted monopoly, but the protection of the Human Right (nothing less!) of the author to own his/her own creation and get paid for its use. To European lawmakers any restriction of the copyright must come with a very strong argument for its necessity for the common good, and often with taxpayer compensation of the authors whose property is being taken away by the government. The fact that most authors sell their work to employers and publishers is recognized and the laws regulate both the terms of employment and help ensure that the work product is valuable to the employers as a precondition for them to have any reason to hire and pay authors in the first place. Keeping in mind that these are the legal theories behind copyright in large parts of Europe will hopefully help U.S. readers of this list to more clearly understand why laws are so different over here, and why license terms and fair use work differently in Europe. IANAL, TINLA. This message is given as part of a public academic or political debate. It carries neither the obligations of legal advice nor is it claimed to meet any standards of scientific work. Just my 2 EuroCents Jakob Link of interest: http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html Note Article 27(2) -- This message is hastily written, please ignore any unpleasant wordings, do not consider it a binding commitment, even if its phrasing may indicate so. Its contents may be deliberately or accidentally untrue. Trademarks and other things belong to their owners, if any.
