<div class="gmail_quote">On 17 March 2010 04:41, James Gray <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:james6.0@gmail.com">james6.0@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Somebody needs to take this through court, IANAL but an EPG is a<br>
collection of facts, which can't be copyrighted in itself.<br>
<br>
I remember the first guy who got a takedown notice (years ago, I can't<br>
remember who is was) got offers for donations to a legal fund, but he<br>
wanted no truck with it...<br>
<br>
It's most frustrating that it always ends up this way<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>In Australia, Nine (the tv network) took IceTV (a for profit company that provides EPG listings to court). Ice TV lost the first round, but won in the high court. <a href="http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/tech/58E69A940B505EACCC25733200726597?Opendocument&HighLight=2,ice,tv">http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/tech/58E69A940B505EACCC25733200726597?Opendocument&HighLight=2,ice,tv</a> However, NZ and Australia copyright laws are very different, as pointed out by the Sensis decision over here (even the phone book can be reproduced here) <a href="http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/newmedia/court-shock-right-to-copy-directories-upheld">http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/newmedia/court-shock-right-to-copy-directories-upheld</a> </div>
</div>