[Sigia-l] Binary data > Information > Content > Copyright

[Listera]

andrew at friendlymanual.com:

> If a document says "do not re-use or re-purpose this content without
> permission", and you do, then the glove fits.

That sounds most reasonable, doesn't it? :-)

It's not that simple though: as Monolith explains, the notion of "this
content" is often ambiguous and possibly impossible to achieve. I lead
product strategy teams in Wall Street so I have to deal with these issues
constantly.

At a relatively early point in conceptual design, I have to consult with
lawyers and compliance officers. Our goals are often diametrically opposed:
they want to prevent a lawsuit, I want to create a product to sell.

Here's an example. One client generates some financial data/info and makes
it available online to the public for free, as mandated by SEC regulations.
Same data is also heavily used in their proprietary tools which are not
free. Now, we are creating a new app that provides a certain set of
financial data only in context, completely customized, sliced and diced to
specific users. Compliance first says we have to make "it" available for
free for the public. However, even if we wanted to, there's really no way to
do that because the data is configured dynamically per each, specific
contextual request. There's no data/content until requested: we don't have
static "pages" that can be published any more. Unless we create a
multimillion dollar app and give it away free, this is not going to happen.
(Yes, the current web page that has the data has a copyright© at the bottom,
yet you can use that data freely, but must pay for it in another context.)

This is not some minor anomaly, literally hundreds of millions of dollars
are made not just by this company but many others with content that appears
to be public/free in one instance and proprietary/for-fee in others, all
seemingly under current compliance.

So same bits are regarded differently in different contexts. As Monolith
says, people are prosecuted for moving digital (music) bits from one device
to another. And yet those bits are not unique at all, unless the copyright
can enumerate every possible permutation of digital configuration of the
analog representation, which is a practical impossibility. An infringer must
be shown to have "re-used or re-purposed" a *specific* permutation
specifically designated by the copyright. So, shuffling digital bits without
analog presentation doesn't readily seem to be a violation, their analog
rendition being another matter altogether.

The experiment pierces through the meaning of "copyright" and "uniqueness"
in the digital age to an extent that, even if we believe in copyright, we
may have to redefine it.

----
Ziya

"If you can't feed a team with two pizzas, the size of the team is too
large."