Posts Tagged ‘ IceTV ’

Casenote: Telstra Corp Ltd v Phone Directories Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 44

Kylie Pappalardo has an excellent case note on Telstra Corp Ltd v Phone Directories Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 44 (Full decision). This case continues the process that began when the High Court tightened the requirements of originality and authorship in IceTV, applying that logic to contain the previous FCAFC authority of Telstra v Desktop Marketing [ READ MORE ]

Big news: Fed Court of Australia rules no copyright in telephone directories

Warwick Rothnie is reporting that the Federal Court has declined to follow Desktop Marketing (which held that telephone directories were protected by copyright in 2002) in light of the High Court’s decision in IceTV (which held that copyright was not infringed by taking time and title information from a timetable). Decision is here: Telstra v [ READ MORE ]

Originality and Transit Sydney: Australia’s low standard of originality claims another victim

  • March 5th, 2009
  • Posted in Uncategorized

copyright, originality, transit sydney, fair use, icetv, dms v telstra, subsistence Asher Moses is reporting today that RailCorp have threatened to sue the developer of Transit Sydney for infringing copyright in their public transport timetables. Transit Sydney is an iPhone app, sold through the store for $2.49 ('just to cover costs'). It provides a display [ READ MORE ]

IceTV: Day one of the High Court hearing

  • October 17th, 2008
  • Posted in Uncategorized

copyright, icetv, database, high court, originality Yesterday was the first day of the IceTV v Channel Nine appeal. Here's some links to follow: A good article by Brian Fitzgerald and Ben Atkinson on the issues: Third Party Copyright and Public Information Infrastructure/Registries: How much copyright tax must the public pay? A writeup on the first [ READ MORE ]

IceTV: the idea / expression dichotomy in the Full Federal Court

  • September 17th, 2008
  • Posted in Uncategorized

copyright, idea, expression, dichotomy, IceTV, Desktop Marketing, Panel, federal court of australia Copyright applies to expression. The ideas which underlie the expression are not protected by copyright.In a literary work, the idea of the protagonist being awoken by a knock is not protectible, but the expression of that idea is: “While I nodded, nearly napping, [ READ MORE ]

Creative Commons

Creative Commons License
Nicolas Suzor's personal blog is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Australia License.