Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!world!eff!mnemonic
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Is information property ? (was: Re: EFF amicus brief in U.S. v. Riggs)
Message-ID: <1991May26.185915.21605@eff.org>
Date: 26 May 91 18:59:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: eff.1991May26.185915.21605
References: <1991May24.190632.28098@eff.org> <1991May26.123647.1059@nntp.hut.fi>
Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
Lines: 30

In article <1991May26.123647.1059@nntp.hut.fi> jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala) writes:
>
>Does this mean that the U.S. courts consider information to be
>property ?  Does this case set a precedent ?

This case does not set a precedent in that regard.

The law on whether information is property is complicated, but information
is not property for the purposes of the Interstate Transportation of
Stolen Property statute, in general. The Supreme Court decided this
issue in a case called Dowling v. United States in 1985.

There are, however, a number of exceptions to this general rule--these
exceptions have to do mainly with cases in which the information was
embodied in some tangible form when it was taken across state lines.

In general, what we call "intellectual property" is not dealt with
under the general theft statutes, but is protected by specific
provisions of the Copyright and Patent statutes.


--Mike



-- 
Mike Godwin,        |         To see a world in a grain of sand
mnemonic@eff.org    |         And heaven in a wild flower
(617) 864-0665      |         Hold infinity in the palm of your hand
EFF, Cambridge, MA  |         And eternity in an hour