So here's my step by step. The walking dead episode where they reveal the spoiler is copyrighted. We know that you only need to repeat a portion of a copyrighted work to infringe. Additionally, to infringe, the new material only needs to be substantially similar to the original work (see Steinberg (SDNY 1987) and…

Your definition of sale is extremely narrow, in light of how the internet works. Typically, on the Internet, content is provided for free to get "clicks" on a web link. Each "click" is a form of revenue, because the content provider sells ad space to advertisers based on how many "clicks" they receive. That's where…

The right being infringed is the right to first publication. Harper discusses that a lot.

Here's an example of what I'm thinking. If someone reproduced a portion of the script that said "…(fade to black, XXXX is struck by the bat and killed)…" they'd be copying the work verbatim. At that point, Harper & Row is plug and play with the facts, because they're the same.

I think the "sweat of the brow" doctrine applies to the creativity used (e.g. the intellectual aspect of intellectual property), and not necessarily the physical work put in. To go super old school, it was probably a tedious endeavor to copy someones map by hand, but since you added none of your own creativity (you…

And to restate it another way, the abstraction of what the copyright covers depends on the type of work created. For example, to infringe computer software you'd need to take a marge larger portion of it than to infringe music (a subroutine v. a riff). When you're taking something about a public occurrence, the…

The thing is, we've never had occasion to create case law like this. That's why there is none out there. A good lawyer will try to divine what goes on based on other examples. We have plenty of examples where a small sample of a paraphrased element of the work of someone else is infringement. Like sampling a song,…

In showing infringement under copyright law we need to take a couple steps. The first being whether the material that was reproduced was copyrightable. As I've said multiple times, a plot point in a made up world is subject to copyright. I'm not sure I have direct SCOTUS or Circuit Court opinions, but they all hint…

My apologies. I misremembered the case law, and when I went back to look at it they did use a Fair Use analysis. Harper Row v. Nation is the case, which is pretty on point (an excerpt of copyrightable material was reproduced before the publication of the copyrighted material).

Reading your post, I'm getting the strong sense you don't deal with the law (and especially IP or copyright).

Your assertion that copyright only covers direct copying of a work, and not paraphrasing or slightly changing is laughable. Under your view, only really stupid people could ever be liable for infringement, and there could probably never be infringement of music by another artist. For example, Battlestar Gallactica…

I didn't rely on Rowling as precedential, but instead as an example of when someone compiling plot points was committing copyright infringement.

Yeah, I cited Nation below. I think it's directly on point.

Look up the stuff with the Harry Potter Lexicon. It was a guy that compiled all of the information in the Harry Potter series into an encyclopedia, and the courts ruled infringement for essentially repeating the events contained in the series. In short, the ruling was that plot points (i.e. story arc) are part of…

RR doesn't have a right to the use of regicide in literature. But he does have the copyright on the specific event that occurred, that his character killed another of his characters, in his universe. I'm not arguing at what breadth he can stop others from using the concept, but instead that his specific embodiment…

With IP, it's always easiest to explain things in terms of how John Locke (philosopher) would have viewed things. Did you do the work? Then you get the benefit. Are you getting benefit from the work of someone else? Then you're probably liable to the person that did the work.

Are you telling me an event in a completely fictional work isn't a fixed expression of an idea?

So, just to point out, TWD is a fictional story, about people that don't exist, in a place that isn't real. Every single aspect of the occurrences of the show are subject to copyright protection, essentially because they're the product of someone's imagination. The fact that something occurs in the story has…

Not sure you have to go there. I'll point you to "Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises" that deals with a copyright holders right to first publication. Presuming, the information obtained was from an inside source (and thus using the unpublished copyrighted material), and not from pure speculation (and thus fair use…

The issue is the work has yet to be published.