[talk-au] repurcussions of IceTV decision

John Smith deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com
Wed Feb 10 23:45:59 GMT 2010

On 11 February 2010 05:33, Liz <edodd at billiau.net> wrote:
> Haven't got far through the judgement so far but this sounds quite clear.
> 7.
> The Copyright Act does not protect facts, ideas or information contained in a
> work, to ensure a balance is struck between the interests of authors and those
> in society: IceTV [2009] HCA 14; 254 ALR 386 at [28] and the cases cited
> therein. The Copyright Act does not provide protection for skill and labour
> alone: IceTV [2009] HCA 14; 254 ALR 386 at [49], [52], [54] and [131].
> and 8.
> The Copyright Act protects the particular form of expression of the
> information:
> (but not if it is computer generated, it must have an author)

The majority of all OSM data has identifiable authors.

Also there is debate over the creativity, the vector information may
not be protected but meta information may be deemed a creative work,
and without a court case it's merely speculation.

In any case Australia is just late to the game, these sorts of
decicions have already been made in other jurisdictions and this is
exactly the reason why some want ODBL.

More information about the Talk-au mailing list