[talk-au] repurcussions of IceTV decision

James Livingston doctau at mac.com
Thu Feb 11 11:19:42 GMT 2010

On 11/02/2010, at 5:33 AM, Liz 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 other thing to remember is that in Australia, a database can have inherent copyright rights independent of the copyright rights of the contents. That is in the same way as EU database rights are independent of the copyright right of the contents, but our database copyright stuff is nothing like the EU database rights in how it works.

My non-lawyerly understanding of the IceTV case was that most of the argument was around whether the they used a substantial portion of the database (e.g. structure) not the facts themselves.

More information about the Talk-au mailing list