CBJN, Counting Systems Not Protected by Copyright Law?

[QFIT]

Almost nothing useful falls under Feist. And Feist is a violation of a treaty signed by the US. Most people think the US is behind strong copyright protections. In fact the US has weaker protections than most countries and fought unsuccessfully to weaken the Berne Convention. The EU specifically protects collections of data.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

You are misreading the decision. In no way does it say compilations of fact cannot be copyrighted. SCOTUS ruled that a simple alphabetic list of all of a company's subscribers was not copyrightable as it was not a piece of work that contained a "minimal degree" of creativity and did not promote progress as required by the Copyright Clause of the Constitution. CBJN is not such a simple list. It is collections of data that have been determined to be useful to card counters. It certainly exhibits a "minimal degree" of creativity and must represent "progress" or people wouldn't pay for it.

The thing that throws people is: suppose CBJN was 100% accurate, and suppose I went out and did the research and created a 100% accurate guide to BJ conditions. We would produce exactly the same thing, but it wouldn't be copied. And at the same time, I could have copied it and there would be no way to prove it.

In the real world CBJN is arbitrary and erroneous enough that an exact reproduction of the data would be beyond reasonable doubt a copy and not the result of independent research.

 

[Cherry7Up]

The EU specifically protects collections of data.

The EU's database protection is quite interesting. Definitely has some pros and cons (e.g. protecting labor-intensive publications like CBJN, but also solidifying de facto monopolies like Thompson/West).

Do you think such broad database protections should be adopted in the US?

 

[Cherry7Up]

In the real world CBJN is arbitrary and erroneous enough that an exact reproduction of the data would be beyond reasonable doubt a copy and not the result of independent research.

My assertion, strenuously and effectively disputed by QFIT, is that even a direct copying (piracy/plagiarism) would not be illegal because CBJN falls outside the realm of protected works.

 

[callipygian]

My assertion, strenuously and effectively disputed by QFIT, is that even a direct copying (piracy/plagiarism) would not be illegal because CBJN falls outside the realm of protected works.

There is another aspect which (I believe) Automatic Monkey is addressing. Let me go back to two quotes of yours from the previous page:

why do you believe that it is protected in spite of the points I raise about its factual nature

CBJN is a collection of facts that clearly fall into the definition of facts in Feist

Automatic Monkey is pointing out that CBJN is not entirely a collection of facts. The penetration, for example, is highly variable, and the reported values often differ from an objective analysis - what one viewer sees as 55% another may view as 60%, and may be objectively 57% +/- 3% for one dealer and 58% +/- 2% for another in the same joint. Thus, if CBJN were to push the value as 55% or 60%, there's a certain amount of non-factuality in that collection.

 

[QFIT]

The thing that throws people is: suppose CBJN was 100% accurate, and suppose I went out and did the research and created a 100% accurate guide to BJ conditions. We would produce exactly the same thing, but it wouldn't be copied. And at the same time, I could have copied it and there would be no way to prove it.

In the real world CBJN is arbitrary and erroneous enough that an exact reproduction of the data would be beyond reasonable doubt a copy and not the result of independent research.

Good point. If you cannot exactly recreate something, clearly it can be copyrighted. A logarithm table cannot be copyrighted because it can be generated by anyone algorithmically. A set of BJ indexes is more art. Which indexes, what compromises, risk averse, what modifications for rules, what generation method. And all generation methods are inexact.

 

[Cherry7Up]

Automatic Monkey is pointing out that CBJN is not entirely a collection of facts. The penetration, for example, is highly variable, and the reported values often differ from an objective analysis - what one viewer sees as 55% another may view as 60%, and may be objectively 57% +/- 3% for one dealer and 58% +/- 2% for another in the same joint. Thus, if CBJN were to push the value as 55% or 60%, there's a certain amount of non-factuality in that collection.

Good point, sorry that I did not catch onto this aspect of Monkey's post initially. This definitely makes the CBJN tables sound protectable even under a stricter reading of cases like Feist.

 

[ccibball50]

Im not sure, but if you cite the source, I would not think it would be compyright infringement. I may be incorrect though.

 

[ccibball50]

Im not sure, but if you cite the source, I would not think it would be compyright infringement since the source is written information. I may be incorrect though.

 

[QFIT]

Im not sure, but if you cite the source, I would not think it would be compyright infringement since the source is written information. I may be incorrect though.

That would be incorrect. Fair Use allows small snipets to be quoted, generally for the purposes of review. This does not allow whole scale copying.

 

[Kasi]

That would be incorrect. Fair Use allows small snipets to be quoted, generally for the purposes of review. This does not allow whole scale copying.

I was just wondering, on another subject perhaps, how this copyright stuff fits in with your products? Is it copyrighted? Or intellectually protected or something?

When someone publishes a sim from your product, is that a violation, maybe technically anyway, but one you choose to not get worked up about becasue maybe it's good publicity?

It never appears to bother you in the least lol but it always bothers me at least a little for some weird reason, that someone asks someone else to use
your product for them and run a specific sim. Or even more than 1.

When could you, or maybe would you, ever draw a line?

 

[FLASH1296]

A software developer bows to the reality that you allude to;
and in so doing, prices his product accordingly.

In a more perfect world, software would be used more
'exclusively' resulting in more modest pricing.

 

[callipygian]

Im not sure, but if you cite the source, I would not think it would be compyright infringement since the source is written information. I may be incorrect though.

You're confusing two related, but different, issues. The first is the issue of plagiarism, the second of copyright infringement. You are considered a plagiarist if you copy something (fair use or not) without referencing. You are infringing on copyright if you copy beyond fair use, whether you reference or not.

 

[QFIT]

I was just wondering, on another subject perhaps, how this copyright stuff fits in with your products? Is it copyrighted? Or intellectually protected or something?

When someone publishes a sim from your product, is that a violation, maybe technically anyway, but one you choose to not get worked up about becasue maybe it's good publicity?

It never appears to bother you in the least lol but it always bothers me at least a little for some weird reason, that someone asks someone else to use
your product for them and run a specific sim. Or even more than 1.

When could you, or maybe would you, ever draw a line?

All QFIT products are copyrighted. My CVData and CVCX licenses specifically allow people to publish sim results. SBA's specifically disallows this and BJRM had to be taken off the market for quite awhile because of this.

 

[Kasi]

All QFIT products are copyrighted. My CVData and CVCX licenses specifically allow people to publish sim results. SBA's specifically disallows this and BJRM had to be taken off the market for quite awhile because of this.

Thanks. Now I don't have to feel so bad :grin:

 

[sagefr0g]

Thanks. Now I don't have to feel so bad :grin:

i'm glad you asked that question. i a few times posted images of sims and stuff, in believe it or not lol, complete innocence.:angel: never even pausing to think of copy write stuff. then when i thought about it i tryed to pm QFIT but his pm is apparently disabled on this site and i never thought to email QFIT's support facility. i know, i'm pretty lame but it's the truth. i did some where back a while ago post a question on this site about if it was ok with QFIT if some images of his programs was posted but i don't think he ever saw it.
so me, i just decided i wouldn't post any specific sim requests unless it was more on theoretical questions sort of things or fun stuff like the week end warriors stuff or discussion sort of stuff.