Delaware
How Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., Inc. applies in Delaware: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Copyright.
Delaware courts generally approach copyright law in alignment with the federal standard set forth in Feist. They focus on the originality requirement for copyright protection and emphasize the absence of creativity necessary for a compilation like a telephone directory to be protected.
In Delaware, a compilation of facts is not eligible for copyright protection unless it exhibits a minimal degree of creativity, adhering to the principles of originality established in Feist.
The court held that a sports database lacked originality because the selection of facts was not sufficiently creative.
The court ruled that historical records compiled without creative input did not meet the originality threshold required for copyright protection.
The ruling affirmed that factual databases compiled without any creative expression are not protected under Delaware copyright law.
Delaware's approach mirrors the federal standard from Feist Publications, emphasizing the need for creativity in factual compilations. However, state courts have occasionally emphasized local precedents that further clarify the application of these principles in Delaware.
Understanding the application of Feist in Delaware is critical for the bar exam, particularly in questions involving copyright protection and originality.