We use cookies to improve security, personalize the user experience,
enhance our marketing activities (including cooperating with our marketing partners) and for other
business use.
Click "here" to read our Cookie Policy.
By clicking "Accept" you agree to the use of cookies. Read less
Understanding the Feist Doctrine: Copyright and Originality in Facts
Definition & Meaning
The Feist Doctrine is a legal principle that states the effort put into compiling a collection of facts does not qualify for U.S. copyright protection if the collection lacks originality. This doctrine emerged from the landmark case Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that mere collections of factual information are not eligible for copyright, regardless of the labor involved in gathering them. However, a factual compilation can be protected if it presents an original selection or arrangement of those facts, but the copyright only applies to that specific arrangement, not the facts themselves.
Table of content
Legal Use & context
The Feist Doctrine is primarily used in copyright law. It is relevant in cases involving the protection of databases, directories, and other compilations of factual information. Legal practitioners often reference this doctrine when determining whether a collection of facts can be copyrighted. Users can utilize tools like US Legal Forms to access templates for copyright applications or to understand how to protect their original arrangements of facts.
Key legal elements
Real-world examples
Here are a couple of examples of abatement:
Example 1: A telephone directory that simply lists names and numbers without any unique arrangement is not copyrightable under the Feist Doctrine.
Example 2: A database of scientific research that organizes studies by their impact factor and provides unique commentary may qualify for copyright protection due to its original arrangement. (hypothetical example)
Relevant laws & statutes
The primary case relevant to the Feist Doctrine is Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991). This case established the legal framework for understanding copyright protection in relation to factual compilations.
Comparison with related terms
Term
Description
Difference
Copyright
Legal protection for original works of authorship.
Copyright protects original expressions, not facts.
Database Rights
Rights related to the investment in obtaining, verifying, or presenting data.
Database rights may offer protection where copyright does not apply.
Common misunderstandings
What to do if this term applies to you
If you are compiling a collection of facts and wish to protect it, consider how you can create an original selection or arrangement. You can explore US Legal Forms for copyright application templates to assist you in the process. If your situation is complex, consulting a legal professional may be beneficial.
Find the legal form that fits your case
Browse our library of 85,000+ state-specific legal templates.