On 8 April 2011 13:46, John Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > In this case it's pretty straight forward and matches the legal > rulings almost identically, computer generated lists aren't covered by > copyright any more, you have to put thought into building such a list > for it to be covered.
If you are talking about IceTV here, then you misrepresent the judgement. The list was covered by copyright, and as much was conceded by IceTV. The case turned on what consitituted a substantial part of the copyrighted work. If you are talking about Sensis, than that is still a Federal Court judgement, which I believe Sensis are seeking leave to appeal to the High Court, and the results will be very interesting to see. I hope the High Court takes the opportunity to clarify what it meant in IceTV. Again with respect, what you regard as "pretty straight forward", is about to be litigated by some of the highest paid lawyers in the country, in front of the highest court in Australia. Do you think they would be spending that time and money if they thought that it was a straightforward area of settled law? Ian. _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
