Copyright (was PDFs and tapeworm descriptions)

[Richard Pyle]

Not to prolong this, but....

> Not to defend the EU stance (which might have changed as the
> US refused to go along with all of the WIPO provisions, but I am
> not sure which ones) but change "type database" to Stephen King
> short story and Rich's database to a "full length novel" and you
> get the scenario envisioned by these folks.

The Stephen King example builds a case for why the original author of
species descriptions might have a copyright claim.  The copyright situation
of King's publisher is analagous to that of scientific journal publishers.
But we're describing a situation where one third party (presumably, neither
the author of the species nor the publisher of their descriptions) compiles
what amounts to an electronic index of information that is otherwise
self-evident to anyone with access to the original publications.  Without
explicit agreements from the species author(s) and/or description
publishers, I can't imagine how any one third-party electronic indexer can
have more legal claim than any other third-party electronic indexer,
regardless of chronology of effort.

> The WIPO web site tracks all this stuff. For more detail (but
> of course, not analysis):
>
> http://clea.wipo.int/

When I get a chance, I'll spend some time looking into the specifics.  For
now, I'll step back from this thread.

Aloha,
Rich