After putting on my hip-boots, I like to wade into this issue, once again, of 'copyright' of genealogical data, particularly on Websites. I'm not sure why this continues to be an issue, unless it's out of total ignorance. Let me state once again...... FACTS ARE NOT COPYRIGHTABLE !!!!!!!!!!! Only the "presentation" , eg, format, is covered by Copyright..... an example..... if you go to the following Henry Co. Cemetery Page: <http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Etndigs/henry/cemetery/moody4.htm>http://www.roo tsweb.com/%7Etndigs/henry/cemetery/moody4.htm You can copy the names and dates of the individuals listed there on that webpage all day long and place them in a book, on a webpage, in a CD, whatever for your own use or sell them WITHOUT VIOLATING THE US COPYRIGHT LAWS. What you CAN NOT DO is copy the whole Website for any use other than your own personal use. Hope that's clear......... You also cannot copy the webpage format and use it present your own data in the same format. What is 'copyrighted' is the format, graphics, presentation, etc. but NOT THE GENEALOGICAL DATA FACTS. I could LEGALLY copy, if wished to, the cemetery names and dates listed in the Benton Co. Cemetery Book and place them on a Benton Co. Cemetery Archive Webpage, the same as the Henry Co. Archive Webpage, and NOT violate the Copyright Laws. US Supreme Court treats this type of 'fact compilation' the same as a Phone Book, which is NOT copyrightable. You may wish to read the following discussion and view the associated WebPages below for a more legalistic rendering............ Dave > > There are two issues that may apply ...................... > > One is the concept of "fair use." At one time it was not covered under > copyrightlaw, but was an unwritten "common law" that was long accepted by > the courts. Now it is covered under the law, but is intentionaly vague. I > have web page that discusses this. > > > <http://www.rootsweb.com/~mikegoad/html/copyright9.htm>http://www.rootsweb > .com/~mikegoad/html/copyright9.htm > > The other issue is that what you have listed is a pure "compilation" of > facts. While facts, by themselves, cannot be copyrighted, the selection > of the facts and the selection, coordination, or arrangement of those facts > can be copyrighted so long as there is some element of originality. My web > page for this is at: > > > <http://www.rootsweb.com/~mikegoad/html/copyright12.htm>http://www.rootswe > b.com/~mikegoad/html/copyright12.htm > > Your compilation of facts, even if all of it were directly from the book, > is not an infringement of copyright at all, in my view. First of all, you > only use a small portion of the book, probably covered under "fair use," > but also not the same selection or arrangement of the facts that the book > has. Secondly, the book probably is probabably marginally covered by > copyright law as the selection and arrangement probably have little > originality, except by limiting the selection to "early" marriages in > "Georgia." Your arrangement by "Grooms" and "Brides" is a fairly standard > arrangement and is not an "original" way of ordering marriages. This is > very well interpreted under a supreme court ruling: > > FEIST PUBLICATIONS, INC., Petitioner v. > RURAL TELEPHONE SERVICE COMPANY, INC. > United State Supreme Court Argued Jan. 9, 1991. Decided March 27, 1991. > CASE SYLLABUS > > <http://www.rootsweb.com/~mikegoad/html/feist.htm>http://www.rootsweb.com/ > ~mikegoad/html/feist.htm > > Originality is a requirement for copyright. > > <http://www.rootsweb.com/~mikegoad/html/copyright4.htm>http://www.rootsweb > .com/~mikegoad/html/copyright4.htm > > Use of material without citing sources is not a copyright issue. It's a > plagiarism issue, which, while in scholarly research is considered > unethical and dishonest, is not illegal. > > <http://www.rootsweb.com/~mikegoad/html/copyright10.htm>http://www.rootswe > b.com/~mikegoad/html/copyright10.htm