School of Journalism and Communication
Borland vigorously argues, however, that the Supreme Court charted our course more than 100 years ago when it decided Baker v. Selden, 101 U.S. 99, 25 L. Ed. 841 (1879). In Baker v. Selden, the Court held that Selden's copyright over the textbook in which he explained his new way to do accounting did not grant him a monopoly on the use of his accounting system....
Borland argues: The facts of Baker v. Selden, and even the arguments advanced by the parties in that case, are identical to those in this case. The only difference is that the "user interface" of Selden's system was implemented by pen and paper rather than by computer....
...Borland even supplied this court with a video that, with special effects, shows Selden's paper forms "melting" into a computer screen and transforming into Lotus 1-2-3....
We do not think that Baker v. Selden is nearly as analogous to this appeal as Borland claims...
("method of operation" is not copyrightable. 1st Cir., 1995)
Copyright & Fair Use (UO School of Law)
Copyright Management Center (U. Texas)
Guidelines for Using Copyrighted Materials in Instructional Settings(Princeton)
National Information Infrastructure Legislation and Information(Stanford)
COPYRIGHT RESOURCES ONLINE (Yale)
Who Owns Digital Works (Scientific American)
International Trademark Association
What's in a Web name? Trouble, if it's `snoopy.com' (Seattle Times)