This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Perspective

Apr. 2, 2009

The Copying Myth

Despite its canonical status, copying as a factual matter is untethered to the language of the Copyright Act and Congress' discernible intent.

By David A. Gerber

The sine qua non of copyright infringement is the defendant's "copying of constituent elements of the work that are original." Feist Publications Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991). Undetectable in this formulation is that "copying" encompasses two quite different requirements. It refers both to the defendant's use of protected material "as a model, template or inspiration," and to appropriation of a sufficient quantum of that ma...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$895, but save $100 when you subscribe today… Just $795 for the first year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up