[pianotech] Steinway parts list

[Delwin D Fandrich]

I see your point as it pertains to telephone lists-a poor example on my
part. However, I would suggest that Steinway's parts and price list goes
well beyond a collection of publically available facts that Steinway is
required to compile under law and therefore should be free for the taking.
Or, as has been happening on Pianotech, copied and publically distributed at
will. 

 

The same Wikipedia article also says:

"Since facts are purely copied from the world around us, O'Connor concludes,
"the  <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_qua_non> sine qua non of copyright
is originality". However, the
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality> standard for
creativity is extremely low. It need not be novel, rather it only needs to
possess a "spark" or "minimal degree" of creativity to be protected by
copyright."

 

Knowing a little something about how price lists are created I can assure
you that any company's parts and price list is considerably more than a
collection of publicly available facts that can be "purely copied from the
world around us." The quantity and cost of raw materials has to be estimated
and analyzed; the amount and cost of factory labor has to be determined;
indirect costs such as warehousing and transportation around the factory
floor have to be estimated; some amount of factory burden has to be
estimated and added to other costs; the cost of pulling the part from
assembly, assigning it to tech services and estimating tech services costs
have to be estimated; and the list goes on. Few, if any, of these times and
costs are publically available facts, nor are they absolutes; they take
analysis, thought and, yes, a certain amount of creativity to create. 

 

ddf

 

 

Delwin D Fandrich

Piano Design & Fabrication

6939 Foothill Court SW, Olympia, Washington 98512 USA

Phone  360.515.0119 - Cell  360.388.6525

del at fandrichpiano.com  <mailto:del at fandrichpiano.com> - ddfandrich at gmail.com

 

From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf
Of David Boyce
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 2:51 PM
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Steinway parts list

 

Del, the phone book case I had in mind was about White Pages. I just looked
it up again, it's Feist v Rural, 1991. In involved the phony numbers thing
that you mention.

There is a very good discussion of it in Wikipedia, which is useful because
it sets out the principles and ideas behind US copyright law very well.

You suggest that 

 Company Y has to gather their own information independently
of Company X's published list; then they are free to publish their own list
based on the information they have gathered as the result of their own work.
Even if the two end up being identical.


Afraid not! The Feist V Rural case established just the very opposite:

"The court ruled that Rural's directory was nothing more than an alphabetic
list of all subscribers to its service, which it was required to compile
under law, and that no creative expression was involved. The fact that Rural
spent considerable time and money collecting the data was irrelevant to
copyright law, and Rural's copyright claim was dismissed".

I think that would apply to Pierce. Try it and see what happens in court!

Best regards,

David.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20110328/f30bb6d1/attachment.htm>