ito

Bulletin of Toyohashi Sozo Junior College 159 2000, No. 17, 159 177 FeistRural (Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service) No. 89 1909 499 U.S. 340; 111 S.Ct. 1282; 1991 U.S. LEXIS 1856; 113 L.Ed. 2d 358; 59 U.S.L.W. 4251; 18 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1275; Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P26, 702; 68 Rad. Reg. 2d (P & F) 1513; 18 Media L. Rep. 1889; 121 P.U.R. 4th 1; 91 Cal. Daily Op. Service 2217; 91 Daily Journal DAR 3580 1991 1 9 1991 3 27 10 Rural Feist FeistRuralRural 916 F. 2d 718 Feist Rural Rural Rural District Court Rural Rural Rural Court of Appeals Feist Rural Rural Feist Feist11 499 U.S. 340, 344 364 Rural a188

160 499 U.S. 340, 344 351 b1976 1909 1976 17 U.S.C. 102a 102b 101 103b 1909 499 U.S. 340, 351 361 crural Rural Rural Rural Rural Rural

161 499 U.S. 340, 361 364 Kyler Knobbe James M. Caplinger, Jr. Rural Rural Rural Rural Rural Feist Feist Feist 15 11 46,878 Rural 7,700Rural Feist Feist Rural Rural Rural Rural Feist

162 Feist 11 1983 Feist 46,878 1,309Rural1982 1983 11 Rural App. 5415 16 57 Feist 4Rural RuralFeist Rural Rural Feist Rural Rural Rural Feist Feist Rural Telephone Service Co. v. Feist Publications Inc., 737 F. Supp 610, 622Kan. 1990 Rural 663 F. Supp. 214, 218 1987 Feist Rural Rural 10 Feist 4,935 4a 916F. 2d 7181990 Rural Rural Feist Feist 498 U.S. 808 Rural 1990

163 A 2 Harper & Row 547 549 Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc v. National Enterprise, 471 U.S. 539, 556 1985 Rural 1 M. Nimmer & D Nimmer, Copyright 2.01 [A] [B]1990 Nimmer 24 1909 1976 1.08 [C] [1] 2 2 100 Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp., 81 F. 2d 49, 54 CA2 1936

164 111 U.S. 58 The Trade-Mark Cases 1 8 8 19 2The Trade-Mark Cases 111 U.S. 58 100 U.S. 821879Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co.Sarony111 U.S. 53 1884 59 60 The Trade-Mark Cases Burrow- Giles The Trade-Mark Cases Goldstein v. California, 412 U.S. 546, 561 562 1973 100 Miller v. Universal City U.S. 94 Studios, Inc., 650 F. 2d 1365, 1368 CA5 1981 2 Patterson & Joyce, Monopolizing the Law: The Scope of Copyright Protection for Law Reports and Statutory Compilations, 36 UCLA L. Rev. 719, 7631551989Patterson & Joyce759 760 140Nimmer 1.06 [A] Burrow-Giles 1.08 [C] [1]

165 2.11 [A] 2 157 Burrow-Giles Nimmer 2.11 [D], 3.03; Denicola 523 38 111 U.S. 58 Nimmer 2.03 [E] Harper & Row, 471 U.S., 547Nimmer Denicola, Copyright in Collections of Facts: A Theory for the Protection of Nonfiction Literary 3.03 Works, 81 Colum. L. Rev. 516, 5251981 Denicola Nimmer 2.03 [E] Patterson & Joyce 800 802 Ginsburg, Creation and Commercial Value: Miller 1369 Copyright Protection of Works of Information, 90 Colum. L. Rev. 1865, 1868 12 1990Ginsburg

166 Harper & Row Ginsburg 1868 471 U.S. 556 557 563 Harper & Row, 471 U.S. 589 Patry, Copyright in Compilations of 188 Facts (or Why the White Pages Are Not,Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Copyrightable), 12 Com. & Law 37, 64 Aiken, 422 U.S. 151, 1561975 Dec. 1990 Patry Patterson & Joyce 776 Harper & Row, 556 557 1

167 1 B 1909 1909 Baker v. Selden, 101 U.S. 99, 1031880Harper & Row 1909 Nimmer 2.01 34 4 35 Stat. 1076 1 8 8 The Trade-Mark Cases Burrow- Giles 471 U.S. 547 548 33 1909

168 Patterson & Joyce 760 761 Nimmer1909 Ginsburg, 1895 Nimmer 2.01 Leon v. Pacific Telephone Jeweler s Circular Publishing Co., 281 F. 88 & Telegraph Co., 91 F. 2d 484CA9 1937 Jeweler s Circular Publishing Co. v. Keystone Publishing Co., 281 F. 83CA2 1922 34 publici juris 5 5 5 14 5 a 5 4 5

169 88 89 publici juris * Miller v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 650 F. 2d, 1372 Harper & Row, 471 U.S. 563 Gorman, Fact or Fancy: The Implications for Copyright, 29 J. Copyright Soc. 560, 563 1982 1909 International News Service v. Associated Press, 248 U.S., 2151918 1909 Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random International News ServiceAP House, Inc., 366 F. 2d 303, 310CA2 1966 385 U.S. 10091967 Associated Press 5 5b 234 * APAssociated Press 248 U.S., 235, 241 242

170 Nimmer 1909 3.04, 3 23 C H. R. Rep. No. 94 1476, 51 1976 H. R. Rep. S. Rep. No. 94 473, 50 1975S. Rep. Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder, 469 U.S. 153, 159 1985 Supplementary Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of U.S. Copyright Law, 89 6 3 H. Judiciary Comm. Print 1965 1909 19093 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law, 87 9H. Judiciary Comm. Print 1961 1976 102 b102b 1976 1 17 U.S.C. 102a 102b Harper & Row, 547, 556 Nimmer 2 2.03 [E] 102a102b

171 102 b 3 H. R. Rep. 57 S. 1 Rep. 54 2 3 1909 5 Patry 51 Mills Music, 469 U.S. 164 2 103 1976 101101 2 3 102

172 Patry 5776 102 H. R. Rep. 57 S. Rep. 55 Moskal v. United States, 498 U.S. 103, 109 1101990 2 Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Co., 188 U.S. 239, 251 1903 Nimmer 2.01 [B]

173 1976 103 103 1909 103a 1976 103 b 102a 102 b 103 103b 101 1976 H. R. Rep. 57 S. Rep. 55 Miller v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 650 F. 1909 2d, 1369 1370 Jeweler s Circular Publishing Co., 281 F. 88 89 70 Jeweler s Circular Publishing Co.

174 Rural2 Feist Financial Information, Inc. v. Moody s Rural1,309 Investors Service, Inc., 751 F. 2d 501, 510 CA2 1984 Newman, J., concurring; Hoehling v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 618 Rural F. 2d 972, 979 CA2 1980 Rural Denicola 516 Rural Burrow-Giles, 111 U.S. 58 520 521, 525Ginsburg 1867, 1870 Rural Rural Feist Rural Feist Rural Patterson & Joyce 776 1,309 Rural 2 1 17 2 103b Harper & Row, 471 U.S. 548 FeistRural Rural 18 9

175 Rural Patterson & Joyce 760144 Rural 1 The Trade-Mark Cases, 100 U.S. 94 Feist Rural Burrow-Giles, 59 60 Kansas Corporation Commission Rural 737 F. Supp. 612 Rural Rural Rural Rural Rural Rural Rural Rural Rural Rural Amici CuriaeInformation

176 Industry Association 10 Rural 1 Feist Baker v. Selden, 101 U.S. 105 Rural Rural Rural 17 U.S.C. 101 Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service, 499 U.S. 3401991 Rural Rural Feist

177 http:// cals2.sozo2.ac.jp/cals/project/pn0900.html E-mail: hirofumi@sozo.ac.jp