Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service

Definition

Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service is a landmark Supreme Court case from 1991 that addressed copyright law and the concept of originality in the context of factual compilations. The case centered on whether a phone directory could be copyrighted, leading to a significant ruling that established that mere compilation of facts does not warrant copyright protection unless there is an original arrangement or selection involved. This decision reinforced the limitations of copyright in relation to facts and data, impacting how media content can be protected under copyright law.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of Feist Publications, determining that Rural Telephone's directory lacked originality since it was simply a factual compilation without any creative input.
2. The case clarified that facts themselves cannot be copyrighted; rather, it is the expression or arrangement of those facts that may qualify for protection.
3. As a result of this ruling, many factual compilations, including databases and directories, are subject to scrutiny regarding their originality to determine copyright eligibility.
4. The decision emphasized the need for creativity in the arrangement of information, impacting how companies compile and present factual data in their media content.
5. Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service has become a pivotal case in copyright law courses, serving as a reference point for discussions on originality and the limits of copyright protection.

Review Questions

• How did the ruling in Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service define the boundaries of copyright protection for factual information?
  • The ruling established that copyright protection does not extend to facts themselves but only to original expressions or arrangements of those facts. The Supreme Court determined that simply compiling data, like a phone directory, does not qualify for copyright unless there is a unique and creative selection or arrangement involved. This decision clarified that while facts are fundamental components of information, they cannot be monopolized through copyright law.
• Discuss the implications of the Feist case on businesses that rely on collecting and distributing factual information.
  • The Feist case has significant implications for businesses in industries such as publishing, telecommunications, and database management. Companies must ensure that their compilations are not just collections of facts but include original creative elements if they wish to obtain copyright protection. This ruling encourages businesses to innovate in how they present information while also understanding that purely factual data remains in the public domain, which impacts their competitive strategies.
• Evaluate how Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service has influenced modern interpretations of originality in copyright law.
  • The Feist decision has fundamentally shaped modern interpretations of originality by reinforcing that copyright law protects creative expression rather than mere facts. This influence is evident in subsequent cases and legislation that emphasize the need for originality in works seeking copyright protection. The precedent set by Feist ensures that courts continue to assess whether there is a unique arrangement or creative input in compilations, thus affecting how creators approach their works and how legal disputes over copyright are resolved in contemporary media landscapes.

Related terms

Copyright: A legal right that grants the creator of original work exclusive rights to its use and distribution, typically for a limited time, with the intention of enabling the creator to receive compensation for their intellectual investment.

Originality: A requirement for copyright protection that refers to the necessity for a work to exhibit some degree of creativity or uniqueness, rather than being purely factual or derivative.

Public Domain: The state of belonging or being available to the public as a whole, which includes works not protected by copyright law and can be freely used by anyone.