An interesting, and potentially disturbing court decision in Europe implies that copying as few as 11 words from a news article may qualify as copyright infringement:
In other words, the program might catch the good bits that make a newspaper article worthy of copyright protection. But the ECJ said it’s up to national courts to decide if any particular article is “original in the sense that they are their author’s own intellectual creation” and thus protected by copyright.
Meanwhile, the Associated Press has been pushing the boundaries of fair use to go after websites that lift as few as 33 words. It would appear the AP now has some precedent to attack so long as it can convince national courts its stories qualify for protection.
On the basis of the blockquote above, The Register will be coming after me, as I’ve copied a lot more than 11 (or even 33) words from their article.
If this filters down to national courts — and AP will do everything they can to ensure that it does — expect a sudden gagging feeling across the blogosphere . . .
AP is being very short sighted. Once they start lawsuits against people and organizations for copyright infringement, for using as little as 33 words, it won’t be long before some bright public figure copyrights their speeches and sues AP for quoting them.
Comment by Clive — August 1, 2009 @ 14:05