Re:EU copyright reforms draw fire from scientists
by sandworm101 on Friday June 15, 2018 @11:21AM
(#17320353)
I am not an EU lawyer, but in north america this sort of academic use would not be a copyright violation.
(1) You cannot copyright facts. A study saying that there are "100 hamsters per square kilometer" does not control that fact. Anyone else can also say that there are "100 hamsters per square kilometer". They don't even meed to cite the original study (plagiarism is different than copyright). This is well-understood doctrine, especially for people who make things like maps. A chart or a table is just a representation of facts. Copyright would only be an issue for something like a diagram or photograph, something with some creative input. And even then ... see (2).
(2) Academic citation is covered by 'fair use'. One academic paper incorporating a bit from another does so to either rely upon it for some grander theory (comment) or to say that it is wrong about something (criticism). Google and similar entities covered by this law add nothing and so are not covered by fair use.
(1) You cannot copyright facts. A study saying that there are "100 hamsters per square kilometer" does not control that fact. Anyone else can also say that there are "100 hamsters per square kilometer". They don't even meed to cite the original study (plagiarism is different than copyright). This is well-understood doctrine, especially for people who make things like maps. A chart or a table is just a representation of facts. Copyright would only be an issue for something like a diagram or photograph, something with some creative input. And even then ... see (2).
(2) Academic citation is covered by 'fair use'. One academic paper incorporating a bit from another does so to either rely upon it for some grander theory (comment) or to say that it is wrong about something (criticism). Google and similar entities covered by this law add nothing and so are not covered by fair use.