by Mike Masnick
Tue, Oct 6th 2009 8:56pm
One good thing in US copyright law compared to other countries is that we don't allow copyright on pure facts or on gov't produced information. Other countries aren't nearly as good about that, with ridiculous concepts like "Crown Copyright." Over in the UK, for example the Royal Mail has apparently bullied some site for making postal code data available. The info has now been taken offline, as the site claims it doesn't have the legal resources to fight this. The Royal Mail says that it was a violation of its intellectual property, and, of course, wants to license the database of postal codes at a mere £4,000 per year -- a bit steep for smaller community or non-profit sites. So, can anyone explain how copyright makes sense here? Was copyright really the incentive necessary to create postal codes?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Dear ZDNet: Comcast Has Been Sketchily Injecting Messages Into User's Browsers For Years
- If You Want To Have Sex With Charlie Sheen, You Have To Give Him The Copyrights On Any Photos You Take Of Him
- Awesome Stuff: Let's Bore The Censors
- Judge Mocks Public Interest Concerns About Kicking People Off Internet, Tells Cox It's Not Protected By The DMCA
- YouTube Puts Some Monetary Weight Behind Fighting For Fair Use: Others Should Too