Hawaii
How Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., Inc. applies in Hawaii: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Copyright.
Hawaii law aligns with the principles established in Feist, emphasizing that copyright protection requires originality and that mere facts are not copyrightable. Hawaii courts have recognized the need for a minimal degree of creativity to meet the originality requirement.
In Hawaii, copyright protection extends only to expressions of ideas, not to the ideas themselves, following the originality standard set in Feist.
The court held that the compilation of facts regarding flight schedules was not protected by copyright as it lacked original expression under the Feist standard.
The ruling emphasized that data and factual compilations require originality to be copyrightable, aligning with the Feist requirement.
The court reiterated that routine collection of facts does not confer copyright protection, affirming principles established in Feist.
Hawaii's approach closely mirrors the federal copyright standard articulated in Feist. Both jurisdictions require a minimum threshold of originality for copyrightable works and distinguish between facts (which are not copyrightable) and the original expression of those facts (which is).
Understanding the application of the originality standard as established in Feist is critical for the Hawaii bar exam, particularly in questions concerning copyrightability.