Klarinet Archive - Posting 000211.txt from 2001/09

From: Donna Higgins <donna@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Re: rental parts' misprints
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 22:29:03 -0400

fred.sheim@-----.net wrote:

> Is this tongue in cheek, or do they really put errors in to prevent
> copyright infringement suits?

I work in legal publishing, and it does happen sometimes. Direct copying can be
very difficult to prove (usually one has to rely on circumstantial evidence -
that the alleged infringer had access to the copied work, and that the two works
are sufficiently similar that copying is the only reasonable explanation). But
two works having precisely the same errors is hardly likely. The thing is, the
errors can't be obvious, or the copier would correct them.

I've written about software copyright cases where the infringer's hide was
nailed to the wall because its code contained exactly the same bugs as the
program that was copied. Whether the bugs were placed there deliberately is
anyone's guess, but if a bug could be included without a high probability of
impairing functionality, it wouldn't hurt the product and it could be very
strong evidence of copying.

I used to work for a small weekly newspaper, and we always suspected our
competitor copied our material (and rewrote it some to try and hide the fact).
This was confirmed when I mistakenly added a zero to a headline and said a local
charitable organization raised $50,000 during a fund raising drive (they
wished!). The real amount was $5,000, but sure enough, the following week, our
competitor reported the $50,000 figure. Oddly enough, rewrites of our stuff
ceased appearing in their paper after that.

- Donna

---------------------------------------------------------------------