Who Facebook stole likes, or copyright limits
Facebook launched new likes and immediately received claims of plagiarism. This time it is argued that the idea of dividing “Like” into different emotions belongs to the writer from Moscow Lana Kaplan (not to be confused with the shooting of Lenin Fanny Kaplan).
')
It should be noted that Facebook is not the first to receive such claims. Even missing the story of the Winklevoss twins, who accused Zuckerberg of stealing the very idea and the network code (and received $ 65 million), we can recall that Facebook also defended the right to use the “like” button in court. The use of “like” and “share” buttons was challenged by the heirs of the Dutch programmer Van der Meer, the creator of the social network Surfbook .
In contrast to the story of Kaplan, the Dutch claimants were in a stronger position, since they didn’t defend the idea itself, expressed in a literary work (we’ll return to it), but a patented solution . However, the lawsuit was denied .
What about the idea of likes in a book?
What is written with a pen can not be cut down with an ax. And the published book is an excellent proof that the idea occurred to the author before it was implemented by the social network.
Quote:
You can add explanations to the likes. For example, let such “likes” appear: “Like sympathetic”, “Like idleness”, “Like vengeful”, “Like admiring”, “Like mediocre”.
The lawyer of the victim says that you can cut down at least $ 100k per idea. But the feature of copyright protection is overlooked. They are guarded through their form, and the idea itself cannot receive protection without form.
Clause 5 of Article 1259 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation
Copyright does not apply to ideas, concepts, principles, methods, processes, systems, methods, solutions of technical, organizational or other tasks, discoveries, facts, programming languages, geological information about subsoil.
In other words, the practical implementation of the ideas expressed in the book is not protected by law. For example, if you publish a recipe, you will not be able to prohibit cooking according to it, but you will be able to prohibit copying it in other publications. The exception for practical implementation is only for individual copyright objects, namely for an architectural, design, city-planning or landscape gardening project (paragraph 10 of clause 2 of Article 1270 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). So if a house is built according to your drawings, this will be the use of the copyright object.
In other cases, it is better to use the appropriate protection mechanisms - patents. Although, as the case with the Dutch inventor showed, even a patent is not always a panacea. Moreover, the ideas published in the book cannot bring you money for their implementation, and as you understand, the writer Kaplan does not shine $ 100k from Facebook.
')
It should be noted that Facebook is not the first to receive such claims. Even missing the story of the Winklevoss twins, who accused Zuckerberg of stealing the very idea and the network code (and received $ 65 million), we can recall that Facebook also defended the right to use the “like” button in court. The use of “like” and “share” buttons was challenged by the heirs of the Dutch programmer Van der Meer, the creator of the social network Surfbook .
In contrast to the story of Kaplan, the Dutch claimants were in a stronger position, since they didn’t defend the idea itself, expressed in a literary work (we’ll return to it), but a patented solution . However, the lawsuit was denied .
What about the idea of likes in a book?
What is written with a pen can not be cut down with an ax. And the published book is an excellent proof that the idea occurred to the author before it was implemented by the social network.
Quote:
You can add explanations to the likes. For example, let such “likes” appear: “Like sympathetic”, “Like idleness”, “Like vengeful”, “Like admiring”, “Like mediocre”.
The lawyer of the victim says that you can cut down at least $ 100k per idea. But the feature of copyright protection is overlooked. They are guarded through their form, and the idea itself cannot receive protection without form.
Clause 5 of Article 1259 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation
Copyright does not apply to ideas, concepts, principles, methods, processes, systems, methods, solutions of technical, organizational or other tasks, discoveries, facts, programming languages, geological information about subsoil.
In other words, the practical implementation of the ideas expressed in the book is not protected by law. For example, if you publish a recipe, you will not be able to prohibit cooking according to it, but you will be able to prohibit copying it in other publications. The exception for practical implementation is only for individual copyright objects, namely for an architectural, design, city-planning or landscape gardening project (paragraph 10 of clause 2 of Article 1270 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). So if a house is built according to your drawings, this will be the use of the copyright object.
In other cases, it is better to use the appropriate protection mechanisms - patents. Although, as the case with the Dutch inventor showed, even a patent is not always a panacea. Moreover, the ideas published in the book cannot bring you money for their implementation, and as you understand, the writer Kaplan does not shine $ 100k from Facebook.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/299088/
All Articles