The Copyrightability of Twitter Posts
TechDirt has an interesting look at some of the questions arising about the copyrightability of Twitter messages. I haven't seen any actual copyright lawyers weigh in yet, but it certainly will be interesting to watch the feathers fly until someone nails down the answer. "[...] it seems like there would be two issues here. The first is whether or not the content is covered by copyright — and, for most messages the answer would probably be yes (there would need to be some sort of creative element to the messages to make that happen, so a simple 'hi' or 'thanks' or whatever might not cut it). But, the more important question then would be whether or not ESPN could quote the Twitter message. And, there, the answer is almost certainly, yes, they could, just as they could quote something you wrote in a blog post."
...automatically assumed to have copyright attributed to the author?
I had no idea Twitter had some mystical "copyright-defeating aura" about its service.
hookers and grits.
as soon as you create something, it is protected by copyright.... as long as you're in the US (YMMV in other countries)
and yes, ESPN can quote.... as long as its newsworthy.... news is covered by fair use...
plus, ESPN is owned by Disney.....
they can get away with anything....
Its not long enough, the snippets would have to be sufficiently expressive to be copyrightable. Like an entire haiku might be copyrightable, but a sentence, idea, thought, or word is not. Otherwise you have copyright law protecting slogans and phrases (the work of trademark law).
The copyrightable expression circulation (circ 34) is currently down, but its normally found here: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ34.html
Is it sad that I am more likely to recognize you and your posts by your sig than your name or UID?
I already have copyright on all possible combinations of 140 characters. You will soon be able to buy an anthology of Znork's collected works on Amazon. It'll be a few trucks and in really fine print, but for the true connaisseur it's definitely worth it.
You can't copyright facts, for example. If you get up on a soapbox on Main St. and yell that the Mayor is a space alien, the local paper can report that you did so without any invocation of copyright. They can quote parts of your screed under fair use. TFA discusses this part, if you'd read it.
Well, given an alphabet of just 'a-z' + ' ', that would be 26 ^ 140 or:
1, 248, 155, 560, 712, 888, 693, 721, 116, 035, 178, 646, 463, 649, 590, 092, 724, 076, 699, 557, 919, 198, 775, 318, 840, 655, 335, 967, 337, 203, 969, 601, 545, 498, 350, 937, 608, 330, 255, 529, 112, 180, 176, 094, 892, 997, 792, 623, 787, 890, 917, 357, 870, 916, 489, 701, 094, 150, 005, 153, 729, 071, 148, 146, 282, 725, 376
which is quite a few possibilities.
Just a simple proof:
Character count is less than
One hundred forty
Copyright © 2009 detachable_halo.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 SourceForge, Inc.
You own the copyright on all of your posts.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
For those playing at home, the number of atoms in the universe is about 10^80. Of course, it's pretty difficult to grasp these kind of numbers anyway, but it should give some kind of scale. And remember, space is BIG.