Wisconsin
How Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. applies in Wisconsin: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Copyright.
Wisconsin follows the foundational principles set forth in Feist regarding originality in copyright law, emphasizing that mere compilation is insufficient for copyright protection unless original elements are provided. The state's courts assess originality in light of the minimal creativity standard established under federal law.
In Wisconsin, to warrant copyright protection, a work must exhibit a modicum of creativity beyond mere facts or data compilations, aligning with the Feist ruling that facts are not copyrightable.
The court ruled that an artist's design, while derivative, contained sufficient original expression to be considered protectable under copyright law.
The court held that academic materials developed by faculty members were not copyrightable as they lacked the necessary originality since they presented no novel expression.
The court determined that transformative use must include original creative input to warrant copyright protection, adhering to the principles outlined in Feist.
Wisconsin's approach aligns closely with the federal standard articulated in Feist by emphasizing the necessity of originality in copyright claims. However, Wisconsin courts may apply a more stringent scrutiny when evaluating the originality threshold compared to certain federal interpretations.
Questions related to copyright principles from Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. are relevant for the Wisconsin bar exam, particularly in the context of originality and protection of compilations.