American Bankers' Association Claims Routing Numbers Are Copyrighted

from the um,-feist-feist-fesit dept

Tue, Jun 25th 2013 9:48am — Mike Masnick

Reader J Cronin alerts us to the apparent fact that the American Bankers Association (ABA) believes that federal routing numbers are covered by its own copyright, and they've sent a takedown letter to a website that published routing numbers. Greg Thatcher runs a website that, among other things, publishes bank routing numbers. Those are the numbers that appear on the bottom of checks that basically tell you how to send the banks money. Thatcher gets those numbers directly from the Federal Reserve's website. Having a single source for those numbers is really useful for people trying to wire money, so you can see why Thatcher's page would be really popular with lots of people. But the ABA sent this bizarre email:

Demand for Immediate Take-Down: Notice of Infringing Activity
URL: http://www.gregthatcher.com/Financial/Default.aspx
Case #: 10
Date: 30 May 2013
Dear Sir or Madam,
The American Bankers Association has received information that the domain listed above, which appears to be on servers under your control, is offering unlicensed copies of, or is engaged in other unauthorized activities relating to copyrighted works published by the American Bankers Association 1. Identification of copyrighted works:
Copyrighted works:
ABA Routing Numbers
ABA Key to Routing Numbers
Copyright owner:
American Bankers Association
2. Copyright infringing material or activity found at the following location(s):

http://www.gregthatcher.com/Financial/Default.aspx
The above copyright works are being copied, displayed and made available for copying by others, including through downloading, at the above location without authorization of the copyright owner.
3. Statement of authority:
The information in this notice is accurate, and I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that I am authorized to act on behalf of American Bankers Association, the owner of the copyrights in the works identified above. I have a good faith belief that none of the materials or activities listed above have been authorized by American Bankers Association, its agents, or the law. We hereby give notice of these activities to you and request that you take expeditious action to remove or disable access to the material described above, and thereby prevent the illegal reproduction and distribution of these copyright works via your company's network. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Please advise us regarding what actions you take.

Yours sincerely,
Gareth Young
Internet Investigator
On behalf of American Bankers Association
1120 Connecticut Ave NW,
Washington,
DC 20036.

As you'll probably note, this is a typical DMCA takedown notice. But it seems ridiculous that they're claiming copyright on routing numbers. Thatcher responded to their email, pointing out that he was providing information that came from the Federal Reserve. While I can understand where he's coming from, his argument doesn't really mean very much. The federal government can distribute copyrighted works. Just because the Fed is distributing it, doesn't mean it's automatically public domain (if they had created the numbers it would be a different story). It would seem that a much stronger argument is that there is no copyright in routing numbers because there is no creativity in them, and they are merely factual bits of information, and you cannot copyright facts.

Either way, the ABA's lawyers from bigshot law firm Covington and Burling shot back that the ABA had, in fact, been "creative" in creating those numbers, and thus it had a valid copyright.

The ABA Routing Number was originally developed by the ABA to identify only check processing endpoints, but has evolved over the years to also designate participants in automated clearinghouses, electronic funds transfer, and on-line banking. These advances in the ABA Routing Number were the result of significant effort and creativity by the ABA. Today there are thousands ABA Routing Numbers and they play a critical role in the integrity of bank payment systems. Each nine digit ABA Routing Number is an original copyrighted work carefully selected and arranged as a result of the ABA's creativity. Copyright exists from the moment of creation of each ABA Routing Number and registration in the United States is voluntary.

I have trouble seeing how that passes the laugh test. The lawyer who wrote those words, Nigel Howard, must have known they were ridiculous when he wrote them. He's an experienced lawyer. In the same letter (embedded below), Howard points out, reasonably, that the ABA is concerned about the continued dissemination of retired numbers. That's a legitimate concern, but it's not a copyright issue. It's also a concern that is easily taken care of by giving Thatcher up-to-date info on routing numbers, or (here's a crazy thought) having the ABA publish them itself. But, no, Howard explains:

The ABA is currently re-assessing with Accuity whether it will engage in any licensing programs, but does not have a licensing program available for websites like yours at the current time.

Well, maybe rather than bullying small sites like Thatcher's with expensive lawyers and highly questionable copyright claims, the ABA should be figuring out a way to fix that problem.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: bankers, banks, copyright, facts, numbers, routing numbers
Companies: american bankers association

76 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

BentFranklin (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:47am

Next up: All IP addresses will be copyrighted!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chris-Mouse (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:54am

Re:
So who owns the copyright to 127.0.0.1?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:57am

The creation of the scheme is creative the numbers in and on themselves are not, they actually are factual data, that no copyright should ever be applied.

At least that is how I see it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:57am

I have trouble seeing how that passes the laugh test.
It helps if you think about sad things. So sad that they are pathetic.

Prenda, for example ;-D
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Argonel (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:57am

Simpsons quote. "These people looked deep into my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined"

I have a hard time believing that a routing number contains any more creative effort than a telephone number. Likely less because I have never heard of a vanity routing number.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:58am

Re:
Hmmm...

I carefully & creatively selected my VPN IP address range so as to minimize the possibility of collision with most LAN IP addresses without having to custom configure the VPN adapter used to connect to it.

I think I should file for a copyright.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:59am

If bank routing numbers are copyrightable, then so are ISBN numbers and any other scheme for cataloging anything.

Which brings me to creativity, what is the effort in creating a serial number?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:00am

Re: Re:
My bet is the person at the other end
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:01am

So I owe ABA whenever I transfer cash between my bank accounts?
So I owe ABA 'licensing' fees whenever I transfer cash between any of my bank accounts?

Hmm, must withdraw all $300,000 from my bank account, and store them in an armed safe to protect my money from the ABA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:02am

Re:
Tell it to the team of artist who spent months crafting each of those nine digits to perfectly reflect the unique qualities of each bank.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:03am

Not original!
A nine digit number is NOT original work, and is NOT copyrightable, ever, for any reason, period.

Looks like the banks just want another slice of the pi!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:04am

What circuit are we in?
Mitel v Iqtel (10th Cir., 1997).

� In Toro the Eighth Circuit rejected the copyrightability of a lawn tractor manufacturer's numbering of replacement parts because the numbers were insufficiently original.�
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:06am

Re:
The Dewey Decimal System is copyrighted. The OCLC made the news a decade or so ago when they sued The Library Hotel in New York for numbering their hotel rooms using it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:08am

Actually, there may be some ROUTING in the numbers.
It's not necessarily arbitrary as IP numbers are: you should try to grasp that in the old days, gadgets had to be simple. So if the numbers do encode information that requires a (minor) act of creating, therefore copyright should apply. -- And no one else has any valid claim! That's another point you kids don't grasp: not everything is YOURS to just do with as you wish. -- But now thanks to Misappropriating Mike, I'm sure you've all got checkbooks out and are looking at the MICR trying to figure out how to abuse it!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
out_of_the_blue, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:11am

Re: Re: @ "So who owns the copyright to 127.0.0.1?"
God. Father, Son, and the Local Host.

(Other religions vary on the point.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:13am

Re: Re: Re:
But the people at both ends of the connection are each claiming patent protection of 127.0.0.1?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:13am

Re: Re: Re: @ "So who owns the copyright to 127.0.0.1?"
Blessed are the geek, for they shall Internet the earth.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:14am

Filing for a copyright
I'm filing for "3".
I creatively selected this number and therefore I should be able to get a copyright on it.

Anyone that uses "3" is going to need to license it.

If you would like to purchase a pre-license, feel free to contact me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:17am

Re: Re:
Dewey Decimal Classification

The system was conceived by Melvil Dewey in 1873 and first published in 1876.

What a fantastic copyright! Ever since 1876!

Eighteen-seventy-six and the copyright is still going strong! Can you believe that!

[ link to this | view in thread ]
dr evil, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:19am

copyright vs patent
I have the patent on making a number have a meaning. I guess they will hear from me about violating my patent with their copyright. (actually, I have a similar problem right now.. a trademark was granted to a group that lifted my websites copyright covered text wholesale.. funny to see some text in there (the trademark docs) that has no relevance to their product)and text here that has no relevance to the post.. :-D

also, they know they are on shaky (like San Francisco earthquake zone shaky) ground since they indicated that they didn't need to register the 'original' (my quotes) work. Guess all phone numbers are copyright covered too? And license plates? And street numbers? Highway numbers? who has the copyright to my SSN?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
dr evil, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:19am

copyright vs patent
I have the patent on making a number have a meaning. I guess they will hear from me about violating my patent with their copyright. (actually, I have a similar problem right now.. a trademark was granted to a group that lifted my websites copyright covered text wholesale.. funny to see some text in there (the trademark docs) that has no relevance to their product)and text here that has no relevance to the post.. :-D

also, they know they are on shaky (like San Francisco earthquake zone shaky) ground since they indicated that they didn't need to register the 'original' (my quotes) work. Guess all phone numbers are copyright covered too? And license plates? And street numbers? Highway numbers? who has the copyright to my SSN?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
michael, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:20am

Re: Re:
"The Dewey Decimal System is copyrighted."

That's a classification system. Routing numbers are not.

Also, the lawsuit you mention was a trademark dispute, not a copyright dispute.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:24am

Re: Actually, there may be some ROUTING in the numbers.
Having a meaning encoded in the number makes it even less copyrightable, as that makes it the number a fact, and not an expression.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:24am

Re: Re:
The Dewey Decimal System is also far more complex, and I believe the copyright protects the system of numbering, not the numbers themselves, as is implied here.

In any event such a claim is extremely tenuous and tedious, and the lawsuit was eventually settled, so I'm not sure if it would have held up in court or not (hopefully not).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:25am

Re: Actually, there may be some ROUTING in the numbers.
It's not necessarily arbitrary as IP numbers are

IP numbers aren't terribly arbitrary.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
dahob, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:29am

Excellent news!

My parents put a lot of effort and creativity into coming up with my name. Thus, they clearly have a copyright to that, transferred to me. Now I just need to file a C&D to all those guys that have illegally copied my name into various databases.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:30am

Payment Due
Hello, ABA? This is the Beast. I see that you took up my offer on the use of those six's and that's great that it worked out for you. Yeah? Yes. (uncomfortable pause) That's correct, right now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:30am

Does the ABA have a copyright licensing program?
Does each check printer get a coypright license from the ABA to print routing numbers on checks?

Various software systems I've worked on over the years, which printed checks, and in some cases the MICR characters at the bottom. We never obtained or heard of any copyright license from the ABA. And we worked closely with one or more banks during development.

So is everyone using ABA in violation of copyright because they have not obtained a copyright license that gives them rights reserved exclusively to the copyright owner?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:34am

Re:
Or watch builders start copyrighting addresses to drive up the price of a new home...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:37am

Re: Re: Re:
I believe the copyright protects the system of numbering, not the numbers themselves

Something's not right there. Copyright covers the expression of ideas. With the DDS, this would be the numbers themselves, or any documents written that describe the system. The system would not be copyrightable, as it is an idea, not an expression of an idea.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:37am

Copyright ALL THE THINGS! it doesn't even have to make sense anymore! I am copyrighting my phone number as we speak!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:39am

Re: Re: Re:
I believe the copyright protects the system of numbering

The �system of numbering� ?

17 U.S.C. �102 - Subject matter of copyright: In general

(b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, SYSTEM, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.

The �system of numbering� ?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:43am

Re: Filing for a copyright
Moronic.

If a collection of letters together (known as 'words') can be copyrighted, why couldn't numbers?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:46am

Re: What circuit are we in?
Intel had a similar setback when it tried to claim its chip numbers were trademarkable.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rich, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:54am

Re: Re: Re:
I believe you missed the joke.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rich, 25 Jun 2013 @ 10:57am

Re: Actually, there may be some ROUTING in the numbers.
What makes you think IP addresses are arbitrary?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
afn29129 (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:00am

Model numbering systems also copyrightable?
Model numbers.

OMC(Evinrude and Johnson) has a model numbering system
that equates INTRODUCES with the numerals 1 thru 0..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TheLastCzarnian (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:02am

Re: Re:
You haven't had to file for a copyright since 1978.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Spaceman Spiff, 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:06am

Number 9?
I'd copyright the number 9, but I think that Disney, Pixar, or some such already have done that...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:07am

Re: Re: Filing for a copyright
Do the math.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:10am

Re: Re: Filing for a copyright
can you copyright a 9 character word?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:13am

Re: Model numbering systems also copyrightable?
ATC Distribution Group v Whatever It Takes Transmissions & Parts (6th Cir. 2005)

ATC claims that WITT and Hester infringed its copyrights in the parts catalog, the individual part numbers contained in the catalog, the illustrations contained in the catalog, and its self-described "Numbering System Manual." Appellees do not contest the allegation that they copied these works and items. Rather, they raise the affirmative defense that ATC abandoned any copyright interests it might have had by widely distributing the catalog, and argue in the alternative that none of the works or items listed are eligible for copyright protection.

The district court rejected Appellees' abandonment claim, but agreed that the catalog, part numbers, illustrations, and the manual lacked the originality required for copyright protection, and that Appellees' admitted copying of these works and items could not have constituted copyright infringement as a matter of law. The district court therefore held that Appellees were entitled to summary judgment on ATC's claim of copyright infringement. Because we agree with the district court that none of the works copied by Appellees were eligible for copyright protection, we need not reach the issue of abandonment.

(Emphasis added.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:17am

Actually, the banks may have a case here - after all, the numbers they used before were so creative they killed economies!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:20am

Re: Re: Re:
You do if you want to be eligible for statutory awards. Plus, a registration helps to prove your case. So while registration isn't required, it sure is helpful if you should decide to sue someone.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:30am

There's no creativity in the first 4 digits of a route, nor the last
There are a set of rules defining what the first 4 and the 9th digit are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Routing_transit_number

A route is a fact, just like an address (or a name)... there may be a element of creativity in there, but it is still a fact.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:41am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm not a lawyer, it just seemed to make sense to me.

Yes I know that logic is probably responsible for half the idiots in congress today.

However, it seems that,

1. It was a trademark dispute, not copyright

2. Unless it was renewed at some point, any relevant copyright has long expired.

3. My point is probably moot
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Avatar28 (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:41am

How is this different than a phone book?
IIRC, one of the companies that made one of those phone book on CD products several years back got sued for copyright infringement. The courts ruled that a list of phone numbers was not copyrightable as it is just raw factual data. The phone book itself (with it's layout and such) could be covered by copyright but the data within the phone book (i.e. the numbers) could not. I believe this would be no different.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Larry, 25 Jun 2013 @ 11:48am

Re: Re:
The same guy that owns: 255.255.255.0
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 12:13pm

Re: Actually, there may be some ROUTING in the numbers.
As usual, Blue, you are wrong about everything.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
G Thompson (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 12:22pm

Re: Does the ABA have a copyright licensing program?
I think you better stop using those Zip codes too.. oh and Feist v. Rural must be absolutely wrong too :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 1:27pm

I'm giving warning to everyone to stay away from my copyright on my phone number "1-800-TROLLING" I creatively arranged numbers in a particular way! =P
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 1:31pm

Re: How is this different than a phone book?
I believe you're referring to Feist v. Rural, which was mentioned in an earlier comment. That case made it all the way to SCOTUS, which gave a 9-0 ruling saying essentially what you did.

This case is not the same as Feist v. Rural. Instead of arguing that their list of numbers is copyrighted, the ABA is claiming that each individual routing number is a copyrighted creative work. The problem with this argument is that it is absurd.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 1:51pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
No I think he actually got the joke.

It would be like saying, who owns the copyright on the clothes I am wearing? The person on the other side of the mirror.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 1:54pm

Re:
Hey, assigning a serial number requires more creativity than many works copyrighted by the RIAA / MPAA.

Therefore various serially assigned numbers (routing numbers, customer numbers, product serial numbers, etc) should be copyright eligible.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Seegras (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 2:32pm

Re:
s/should/can/ It's impossible to copyright facts.

(a) Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. Works of authorship include the following categories:

(1) literary works;
(2) musical works, including any accompanying words;
(3) dramatic works, including any accompanying music;
(4) pantomimes and choreographic works;
(5) pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works;
(6) motion pictures and other audiovisual works;
(7) sound recordings; and
(8) architectural works.

there is no category "information" there. And as long as you don't enact any stupid "Leistungsschutzrecht", there is no way that there CAN be any rights on it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Olinga Abbott, 25 Jun 2013 @ 7:55pm

Started change.org petition
I started a change.org petition about this.

https://www.change.org/petitions/american-bankers-association-stop-claiming-copyrights-on-r outing-numbers-and-harassing-greg-thatcher
[ link to this | view in thread ]
allengarvin (profile), 25 Jun 2013 @ 8:55pm

Re: Re: (Dewey Decimal)
"The OCLC made the news a decade or so ago when they sued The Library Hotel in New York for numbering their hotel rooms using it."

I remember that story! It looks like they weren't successful in their lawsuit:

http://www.libraryhotel.com/dewey-decimal-system.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:12pm

The ABA's attorneys are certainly *saying* the right things and making the right arguments, but I doubt the facts would support their claim for sufficient originality to warrant copyright protection.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:27pm

Re: Not original!
Why not?

The courts certainly don't agree with that categorical statement. For example, the Ninth Circuit has held that price estimates (consisting of less than nine digits) are protectable by copyright in at least one case.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:27pm

Re: What circuit are we in?
Mitel is a good opinion for people who want to claim copyright on short numbers/phrases (even though I don't think the plaintiffs won in that particular case).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:29pm

Re: Re: What circuit are we in?
Apples and oranges. Although, as Chuck Klosterman argues, apples and oranges are actually pretty similar in the grand scheme of things.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:30pm

Re: Re: Actually, there may be some ROUTING in the numbers.
That's like saying "having meaning encoded in words makes them even less copyrightable, as that makes the words a fact, and not an expression."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:34pm

Re: Re: Re: Filing for a copyright
Pretty damn unlikely, but I wouldn't put it out of the range of possibility.

The general rule from courts that have really considered copyright protection for very short works is that the shorter the work (e.g., word or phrase), the greater the quotient of originality required to obtain protection.

I'm not aware of any case ever upholding copyright protection for a single word. I am aware of cases upholding copyright protection for, e.g., price estimates.

In fact, there was a recent case that refused to grant summary judgment of no copyright protection for a ranking of an NFL draft prospect (which could reasonably be characterized as a single number).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jun 2013 @ 9:40pm

Re: There's no creativity in the first 4 digits of a route, nor the last
So it looks like only the 4-digit ABA institution identifier is a *potential* source of sufficient originality for copyright protection.

Good luck with that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 26 Jun 2013 @ 1:05am

Re: Re: Re: Actually, there may be some ROUTING in the numbers.
Words can be used to express things, and the resulting expression can be copyrightable. But, the words themselves are not (except, perhaps, in cases of brand names, etc. but that's more trademark law than copyright).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 26 Jun 2013 @ 1:56am

Re: Actually, there may be some ROUTING in the numbers.
"arbitrary as IP numbers are"

Damn, that's the dumbest thing I've read from you guys since an AC tried claiming that WEP wasn't crackable!

If you put as much effort into actually learning how technology works as you do in spouting uninformed garbage... well, you probably wouldn't post here. Either you'd spend too much time actually learning how the real world works, or you'd be so ashamed at how wrong you've been all this time you wouldn't show your face.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Niall (profile), 26 Jun 2013 @ 3:15am

Re: Not original!
The bankers have copyrighted their preferred salary figures, and those numbers cannot be controlled or taken away by anyone else.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Richard (profile), 26 Jun 2013 @ 4:39am

Re: Re: Re:
OCLC owns all copyright rights in the Dewey Decimal Classification, and licenses the system for a variety of uses.

That does not prove that there actually are any such rights!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 26 Jun 2013 @ 4:54am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Plus, a registration helps to prove your case.

Southco v Kanebridge (3rd Cir. En Banc, 2004)

Relying on the short phrases regulation, the government tells us, "the Register of Copyrights routinely determines that a part number does not `constitute[ ] copyrightable subject matter'" under 17 U.S.C. � 410. The government also calls to our attention letters from the Examining Division of the Copyright Office that illustrate this practice, and the government notes that Congress has not disturbed "the Copyright Office's long-standing practice against registering short phrases, despite repeated and extensive revisions of the copyright code."

�.�.�.�.

We believe that the Copyright Office's longstanding practice of denying registration to short phrases merits deference.[Note 5]�[Cases omitted.] We accept the Copyright Office position and believe that it logically extends to part numbers.

[Note 5] We do not decide what degree of deference is warranted under the circumstances.�.�.�.�.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John William Nelson (profile), 26 Jun 2013 @ 6:53am

Why this happens�from a lawyer
Covington Burling lawyers need to bill hours. Nigel Howard is no exception. His client, the American Bankers Association, believed (wrongly) that they have an "ownership" right in some numbers.

Instead of explaining to the client that there stance is incorrect, Covington Burling decides to back an incorrect cease and desist letter.

Let's be charitable. Let's say Mr. Howard spent 1 hour reading the response from Mr. Thatcher, reviewing the file in the matter, and drafting his letter. Or, alternatively, as a partner he may have had an associate spend this 1 hour.

Depending on who spent the time�Mr. Howard or Joe Doe Associate�you have the potential of this 1-hour bill being $300 or $500. This is another billable hour for the firm. Another billable hour for the partner's credit (and possibly the associate's).

Further, this billable hour will get lost on an invoice to the ABA which includes many billable hours for many matters. So the ABA general counsel will not notice and question the hour.

Plus, there may be a followup response from Mr. Thatcher. That will be more time that gets to be billed. Not a lot, but nevertheless a nice bit of time for the firm. Let's say another 2-3 hours potentially in the tune of potentially another $1,500.

In fact, this matter could be managed in such a way that this becomes a bigger issue for the ABA. Heck, maybe there are a series of correspondence, and more research has to be done on the question of whether these numbers are copyrightable. Then the insignificant matter becomes a real "project." This project might end up with another 10-20 hours of partner and associate time�anywhere from $6k to $20k.

Plus, Mr. Howard does not have to initially challenge the premises of his client. Instead of serving his client by actually advising his client on the law, and on the practical side effects of these kinds of actions (such as this story on Techdirt), he can choose not to counsel his client and instead send out clearly erroneous threat letters.

The upside is two-fold: (1) not challenging an important client on questionable decisions and (2) potentially milking more from this matter down the line.

The only down side really is that Covington Burling and Mr. Howard have chosen not to counsel their client on the legal and practical issues facing it in this matter. They have declined to discuss the risks associated with this kind of practice. They have waived their duty to counsel their client in lieu of serving merely as a drafter of legal documents.

This happens all the time with many lawyers. For example, look at the case involving that New Jersey township ( Epic Cease and Desist Letter ). The lawyer is looking to get paid. A side effect of the initial silly letter is that it fires up the other side (sometimes) and results in more billable hours. If it doesn't fire up the other side, then that usually means the bullying and intimidation based on questionable or false legal grounds worked and silenced a client's critics. One way results in more money for the lawyer, the other results in a satisfied client. Neither results in counseling a client on the risks associated with a particular legal action.

I deal with lawyers like this more often than I wish. Some will even admit they don't care about the law and are just satisfying their client's wishes. I wish I could say this will result in those lawyers making less money, or having less respect in the legal industry, or having a harder time finding clients, but I cannot.

You just have to deal with the jackasses as they come.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jdea (profile), 26 Jun 2013 @ 8:16am

URL copyright
Are the ABA not aware that by copying & pasting web site URLs into their DMCA takedown notices, they are violating the copyright on those URLs?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 26 Jun 2013 @ 9:31am

Re: Why this happens�from a lawyer
This includes a hell of a lot of assumptions.

The Covington attorney(s) may very well have advised the ABA about the weakness of their position, but told them that they could make the claim and send out the letter and see what happens for about $_________. Perhaps the ABA thought that was a wise use of funds to try to prevent a use they don't like.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 26 Jun 2013 @ 11:13am

Re: Re:
Yeah it's not easy when they're limited in their use of the number of the beast.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Charles R, 27 Jun 2013 @ 2:16am

Case Law
Unfortunately, there is some case law that supports the ABA's position.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/197_F3d_1256.htm

But there is also case law that supports Greg.

Here are some overviews.

http://www.coolcopyright.com/chp4.htm

I know Greg personally and I'm going to recommend that he contact the EFF. If anyone can and would help it would be them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
alan, 2 Jul 2013 @ 3:05am

Thank God I am not an American!
These days I find myself thinking every few days that I am glad I am European.

In the United States the bullying of individuals by large organisations and the recent spy scandal involving your European Allies are just incredible.

"Those whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Andrew, 26 Aug 2013 @ 7:53am

Our Response
We sent out this response to the takedown letter on Friday. Enjoy.

http://martinassociateslaw.us/About%20Us/misc/thatcher.pdf
[ link to this | view in thread ]