Brewer Andy
Active member
- Aug 10, 2008
- 9,634
- 21
Not a clue.
I can't seem to make this point clear, but it is technically not about the content of the checklists that is the issue. One cannot copyright facts.
it is about the presentation of the checklists. To quote CaseBriefs.com about the Feist v. Rural Telephone Service Co decision:
So while multiple companies can produce phone books containing the exact same names and numbers, one company cannot simply photocopy the other company's work and sell it. It is not the data to which Beckett applies its copyright claims, but the way they have arranged and displayed them. If Beckett’s listing for a card says this:
2005 Upper Deck HOF Signs of Cooperstown Quads Autograph Gold #BSAY Banks/Ozzie/Apar/Yount
Anyone else producing a checklist of the same set needs to make some effort to differentiate their version of the facts like this:
2005 Upper Deck Hall of Fame Signs of Cooperstown Quad Autographs Gold #BSAY Ernie Banks / Ozzie Smith / Luis Aparicio / Robin Yount
What makes it obvious that people are copying Beckett's checklists is that for many more complicated cards, the other sites are using the exact same arrangement and text of Beckett's (sloppy) listings. If other sites would make the simple effort of cleaning up the data before reproducing it, there is no case. Beckett's checklists tend to be messy because of space saving measures dating back to their print business, and the often leave off prefixes to card numbering and even introduce erroneous numbering for some sets that are unnumbered or where Beckett simply couldn't be bothered to find the correct numbering. Other sites really need to be pushing themselves to improve upon what Beckett has done, not simply regurgitate it verbatim.
Solid, and that clears it up a bit